linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/4] firmware: of: populate /firmware/ node during init

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 28 Sep 2017 11:47:26 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH 0/4] firmware: of: populate /firmware/ node during
 init



On 28/09/17 11:44, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Rob, Arnd,
> 
> There's a push to place all firmware related device node under
> /firmware/ node. However all the associated drivers are dealing with
> device creation in their own ways. For example, qcom_scm, optee and
> meson-sm drivers deal with the node in their own way. The SCMI drivers
> I am about to add also needs to do the same. This small series is to
> make it generic so that all the users of /firmware/ node need not
> repeat the same.
> 
> There was concern that /firmware in DT is fit for /sys/firmware in sysfs.
> IMO anything exposed to userspace from such firmware interface must
> be in "/sys/firmware", but I don't see any issue with kernel handling
> them as platform device/driver internally.
> 

Please ignore this, something went wrong and patches were not delivered,
have reposted it separately.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep