linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/2] platform: different approach to early platform drivers

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: <6d1f9114-f1d1-961f-4f36-74adff059dc3@lechnology.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 Apr 2018 21:28:39 -0500
From:   David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
To:     Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Arend van Spriel <aspriel@...il.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Michal Suchanek <msuchanek@...e.de>,
        Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC PoC 0/2] platform: different approach to early
 platform drivers

On 04/26/2018 12:31 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 05:29:18PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
>>
>> This is a follow to my series[1] the aim of which was to introduce device tree
>> support for early platform devices.
>>
>> It was received rather negatively. Aside from using device tree to pass
>> implementation specific details to the system, two important concerns were
>> raised: no probe deferral support and the fact that currently the early devices
>> never get converted to actual platform drivers. This series is a
>> proof-of-concept that's trying to address those issues.
>>
>> The only user of the current version of early platform drivers is the SuperH
>> architecture. If this series eventually gets merged, we could simply replace
>> the other solution.
> 
> Looking at a quick output of:
> 
> 	grep -r -A10 early_devices[[] arch/sh/kernel/
> 
> it looks like all of the existing early platform devices are serial
> ports, clocks, and clocksources. The switch to device tree should pick
> them all up from CLK_OF_DECLARE, TIMER_OF_DECLARE, and
> EARLYCON_DECLARE. Until that's complete, the existing code works
> as-is. I don't see what problem you're trying to solve.

The problem for us is that clk maintainers don't want new drivers to use
CLK_OF_DECLARE and instead use platform devices. I have just written such
a new driver that is shared by 6 different SoCs. For some combinations of
SoCs and clocks, using a platform device is fine but on others we need to
register early, so the drivers now have to handle both cases, which is
kind of messy and fragile. If there is a generic way to register platform
devices early, then the code is simplified because we only have to handle
one method of registering the clocks instead of two.

> 
> FYI I'm (sometimes-somewhat-absent) arch/sh co-maintainer.
> 
> Rich
>