[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL_JsqL5gYh_++1wDLMYjO7MXKOHpzr315FZ1tuN9o5tOe7TYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 07:31:27 -0600
From: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc: Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>,
Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
Moritz Fischer <mdf@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
> On 11/27/17 15:58, Alan Tull wrote:
>> Here's a proposal for a whitelist to lock down the dynamic device tree.
>>
>> For an overlay to be accepted, all of its targets are required to be
>> on a target node whitelist.
>>
>> Currently the only way I have to get on the whitelist is calling a
>> function to add a node. That works for fpga regions, but I think
>> other uses will need a way of having adding specific nodes from the
>> base device tree, such as by adding a property like 'allow-overlay;'
>> or 'allow-overlay = "okay";' If that is acceptable, I could use some
>> advice on where that particular code should go.
>>
>> Alan
>>
>> Alan Tull (2):
>> of: overlay: add whitelist
>> fpga: of region: add of-fpga-region to whitelist
>>
>> drivers/fpga/of-fpga-region.c | 9 ++++++
>> drivers/of/overlay.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/of.h | 12 +++++++
>> 3 files changed, 94 insertions(+)
>>
>
> The plan was to use connectors to restrict where an overlay could be applied.
> I would prefer not to have multiple methods for accomplishing the same thing
> unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
Connector nodes need a mechanism to enable themselves, too. I don't
think connector nodes are going to solve every usecase.
Rob
Powered by blists - more mailing lists