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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180704105349.GA14665@e107155-lin>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jul 2018 11:53:49 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Nikolaus Voss <nikolaus.voss@...wensteinmedical.de>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Srinath Mannam <srinath.mannam@...adcom.com>,
        "Voss, Dr. Nikolaus" <Nikolaus.Dr.Voss@...wensteinmedical.de>,
        "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>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, nv@...n.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ACPI: bus: match of_device_id using acpi device

On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 12:17:20PM +0200, Nikolaus Voss wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2018, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> >

[...]

> >+1 on NACK for this and anything else that abuse PRP0001 as a short cut
> >approach.
>
> This is no abuse but exactly what PRP0001 is meant for. The basic idea of
> PRP0001 is to reuse DT "compatible" strings in ACPI namespace, see
> Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt. Reusing also means getting access to the
> of_device_id.
>

Sorry for not being descriptive. It has been discussed a lot in past and
I assume someone would had gone through them, so gave no information in
my response.

> Allocating an ACPI id for an already existing DT driver is redundant, isn't it?
>

I think Andy had provided the summary and the intentions. Rafael has also
confirmed, I have nothing else to add.

--
Regards,
Sudeep