linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ACPI / PNP: Don't add "enumeration_by

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: <27c3f84e-4d53-4b6b-7382-04908082ed01@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 20 Apr 2018 14:24:18 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     <rjw@...ysocki.net>, <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, <lenb@...nel.org>,
        <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <arnd@...db.de>, <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>, <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        <linuxarm@...wei.com>, <z.liuxinliang@...ilicon.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] ACPI / PNP: Don't add "enumeration_by_parent"
 devices

Hi Mika,

On 20/04/2018 14:07, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 06:07:25PM +0800, John Garry wrote:
>> +	} else {
>> +		device->driver_data = dev;
>
> I think this deserves a comment explaining why we (ab)use driver_data
> like this.

Sure, could add. I didn't see any other way for the acpi_device 
structure to reference the derived PNP device.

TBH, This overall approach is not good since we are creating the PNP 
device in the scan, and then leaving the device in limbo, waiting for 
the parent to add it, if at all. There's no rule for this.

So I'm looking for ideas on how to improve this.

Thanks,
John

>
> .
>