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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <fdb60100-3973-b9e3-487a-882836f8751e@arm.com> Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 17:37:48 -0600 From: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com> To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>, Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, jhugo@...eaurora.org, wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com, Jonathan.Zhang@...ium.com, Al Stone <ahs3@...hat.com>, Jayachandran.Nair@...ium.com, austinwc@...eaurora.org, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/9] drivers: base cacheinfo: Add support for ACPI based firmware tables On 12/12/2017 05:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:55 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> On 12/12/2017 11:25 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> > > [cut] (trimming list) > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> What about converting this to using struct fwnode instead of adding >>>>> fields to it? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I didn't really want to add another field here, but I've also pointed out >>>> how I thought converting it to a fwnode wasn't a good choice. >>>> >>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/20/502 >>>> >>>> Mostly because IMHO its even more misleading (lacking any >>>> fwnode_operations) >>>> than misusing the of_node as a void *. >>> >>> >>> I'm not sure what you mean. >> >> >> Converting the DT drivers/cacheinfo.c code to use a fwnode_handle is >> straightforward. But IMHO it doesn't solve the readability problem of either >> casting the ACPI/PPTT token directly to the resulting fwnode_handle *, or >> alternatively an actual fwnode_handle with bogus fwnode_operations to wrap >> that token. > > I'm not talking about that at all. > >>> >>> Anyway, the idea is to have one pointer in there instead of two that >>> cannot be used at the same time and there's no reason why of_node >>> should be special. >> >> >> Avoid two pointers for size, or readability? Because the last >> version had a union with of_node, which isn't strictly necessary as I can >> just cast the pptt token to of_node. There is exactly one line of code after >> that which uses the token and it doesn't care about type. > > So call this field "token" or similar. Don't call it "of_node" and > don't introduce another "firmware_node" thing in addition to that. > That just is a mess, sorry. I sort of agree, I think I can just change the whole of_node to a generic 'void *firmware_unique' which works fine for the PPTT code, it should also work for the DT code in cache_leaves_are_shared(). The slight gocha is there is a bit of DT code which initially runs earlier that uses of_node as an indirect parameter to a couple functions (by just passing the cacheinfo). Let me see if I can tweak that a bit. Frankly, If I understood completely all the *priv cases I suspect it might be possible to collapse *of_node into that as well. That is as long as no one decides to flush out DT on x86, or PPTT on x86.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists