linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/14] ARM: davinci: step towards removing at24_platform

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]

Date:   Tue, 26 Jun 2018 15:21:54 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@...aro.org>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/14] ARM: davinci: step towards removing
 at24_platform_data

> I see. I see it this way: the setup callback comes from the time when
> we didn't have nvmem and should go away. I will protest loud whenever
> someone will try to use it again and will work towards removing it as
> soon as possible.

The setup() callback could be moved into the nvmem framework, rather
than in the at24 driver. Make the call when the cells have been
connected to the backing store.

> I will give your problem a thought and will try to get back with some
> proposals - maybe we should, as you suggested, extend nvmem even
> further to allow to remove nvmem info entries etc.

That does not help me too much. I have the same problem with i2c and
MDIO. So i actually prefer to keep this the same as all others.

	Andrew