linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] leds: lp8860: Update the LED label generation

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

Message-ID: <7f273cf6-984f-03ad-1ff1-ecfe4e5f024d@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 3 Dec 2017 15:00:10 +0100
From:   Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>
To:     Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>, rpurdie@...ys.net, pavel@....cz
Cc:     linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] leds: lp8860: Update the LED label generation

Dan,

On 12/01/2017 05:59 PM, Dan Murphy wrote:
> On 12/01/2017 10:56 AM, Dan Murphy wrote:
>> Fix the LED label generation for the LP8860 to
>> conform with the
>>
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/leds/common.txt
>>
>> document indicating the LED label should be part of a
>> child node to the device parent.  If no label is
>> in the child node then the LED label is created based
>> on the parent node name and the alternate name passed in.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
>> ---
>>
>> v6 - New patch to use the new LED class API
>>
>>  drivers/leds/leds-lp8860.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
>>  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-lp8860.c b/drivers/leds/leds-lp8860.c
>> index 3e70775a2d54..26bbfa144402 100644
>> --- a/drivers/leds/leds-lp8860.c
>> +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-lp8860.c
>> @@ -22,6 +22,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/of_gpio.h>
>>  #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
>>  #include <linux/slab.h>
>> +#include <uapi/linux/uleds.h>
>>  
>>  #define LP8860_DISP_CL1_BRT_MSB		0x00
>>  #define LP8860_DISP_CL1_BRT_LSB		0x01
>> @@ -86,8 +87,6 @@
>>  
>>  #define LP8860_CLEAR_FAULTS		0x01
>>  
>> -#define LP8860_DISP_LED_NAME		"display_cluster"
>> -
>>  /**
>>   * struct lp8860_led -
>>   * @lock - Lock for reading/writing the device
>> @@ -107,7 +106,7 @@ struct lp8860_led {
>>  	struct regmap *eeprom_regmap;
>>  	struct gpio_desc *enable_gpio;
>>  	struct regulator *regulator;
>> -	const char *label;
>> +	char label[LED_MAX_NAME_SIZE];
>>  };
>>  
>>  struct lp8860_eeprom_reg {
>> @@ -318,7 +317,7 @@ static const struct regmap_config lp8860_regmap_config = {
>>  	.max_register = LP8860_EEPROM_UNLOCK,
>>  	.reg_defaults = lp8860_reg_defs,
>>  	.num_reg_defaults = ARRAY_SIZE(lp8860_reg_defs),
>> -	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
>> +	.cache_type = REGCACHE_RBTREE,
>>  };
>>  
>>  static const struct reg_default lp8860_eeprom_defs[] = {
>> @@ -356,7 +355,7 @@ static const struct regmap_config lp8860_eeprom_regmap_config = {
>>  	.max_register = LP8860_EEPROM_REG_24,
>>  	.reg_defaults = lp8860_eeprom_defs,
>>  	.num_reg_defaults = ARRAY_SIZE(lp8860_eeprom_defs),
>> -	.cache_type = REGCACHE_NONE,
>> +	.cache_type = REGCACHE_RBTREE,
>>  };
>>  
>>  static int lp8860_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>> @@ -365,19 +364,23 @@ static int lp8860_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>  	int ret;
>>  	struct lp8860_led *led;
>>  	struct device_node *np = client->dev.of_node;
>> +	struct device_node *child_node;
>> +
>> +	if (!client->dev.of_node)
>> +		return -ENODEV;
> 
> This is actually a bug in the driver.  I can submit this independently or keep this here
> 
>>  
>>  	led = devm_kzalloc(&client->dev, sizeof(*led), GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!led)
>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>>  
>> -	led->label = LP8860_DISP_LED_NAME;
>> +	for_each_available_child_of_node(np, child_node) {
>> +		led->led_dev.default_trigger = of_get_property(child_node,
>> +						    "linux,default-trigger",
>> +						    NULL);
> 
> Not sure if you want me to pull this out into a different patch or just add it to the
> commit message

Yes, it would be nice. Also related change in DT bindings should be
placed in the same patch.

>>  
>> -	if (client->dev.of_node) {
>> -		ret = of_property_read_string(np, "label", &led->label);
>> -		if (ret) {
>> -			dev_err(&client->dev, "Missing label in dt\n");
>> -			return -EINVAL;
>> -		}
>> +		of_led_compose_name(np, child_node, "white:backlight",
>> +				sizeof("white:backlight"),
>> +				led->label);
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	led->enable_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&client->dev,
>>
> 
> 

-- 
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski