linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPI: bus: match of_device

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:   Wed, 4 Jul 2018 10:38:33 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Srinath Mannam <srinath.mannam@...adcom.com>,
        Nikolaus Voss <nikolaus.voss@...wensteinmedical.de>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>,
        Vladimir Olovyannikov <vladimir.olovyannikov@...adcom.com>,
        Vikram Prakash <vikram.prakash@...adcom.com>,
        Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPI: bus: match of_device_id using acpi device



On 04/07/18 10:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 6:37 AM, Srinath Mannam
> <srinath.mannam@...adcom.com> wrote:
>> Hi Sudeep, Andy,
>>
>> Yes, This patch is to get of_device_id and then fetch data pointer.
>>
>> To add ACPI support in multiple drivers which are device-tree based
>> and has list of of_device_ids, by using this function
>> very minimal changes and can avoid acpi_device_id list in the driver.
>> I will send driver changes where this function used to add ACPI
>> support in following patches.
>>
>> Below are the changes added to add ACPI support in sdhci iproc driver
>> using this function.
> 
> So, did you get an ACPI ID for it?
> That's how proper ACPI support should be done.
> 
> P.S. What you are trying to do is being discussed with Nikolaus in [1].
> I have to NAK your approach in any case. Sorry.
> 

+1 on NACK for this and anything else that abuse PRP0001 as a short cut
approach.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep