linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/2] mfd: platform/chrome: some more cleanups between these subsystems.

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20180718160956.19864-1-enric.balletbo@collabora.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jul 2018 18:09:54 +0200
From:   Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     groeck@...omium.org, bleung@...omium.org, kernel@...labora.com,
        lee.jones@...aro.org, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] mfd: platform/chrome: some more cleanups between these subsystems.

Dear Lee, Benson,

This is another patchset to try to cleanup a bit more the interaction
between the mfd subsystem and platform/chrome.

The first patch moves some cros-ec include files from include/linux/mfd to
platform/chrome. They are specific to the lpc transport driver and are not
related to the mfd subsystem, so, there is no reason to have them living
in include/linux/mfd.

The second patch tries to cleanup and fix some kerneldoc commments in
the remaining mfd/cros-ec include files. For now I only improved a bit
the documentation and fixed the warnings reported by kerneldoc. I think
that there is still a lot of improvement pending, specially in the
cros_ec_commands.h file, but this is something I'd like to have the
agreement of the chromeos folks as I know this file is used as interface
for the EC firmware. As far as I know the kernel doesn't cares about this,
but I know this is source of conflicts for the chromeos folks.
Usually, in the chromeos kernel, the cros_ec_commands file is synced
with the version available from the EC firmware but maybe we should
reconsider this and have a well documented file in the kernel and sync
in the other way. I am just thinking out loud.

Best regards,
 Enric

Enric Balletbo i Serra (2):
  platform/chrome: Move mfd/cros_ec_lpc* includes to drivers/platform.
  mfd: cros_ec: Fix and improve kerneldoc comments.

 drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.h                     |  13 +-
 drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc.c         |   3 +-
 drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc_mec.c     |   3 +-
 .../platform/chrome}/cros_ec_lpc_mec.h        |   6 +-
 drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_lpc_reg.c     |   3 +-
 .../platform/chrome}/cros_ec_lpc_reg.h        |   6 +-
 include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h                   | 214 +++++++------
 include/linux/mfd/cros_ec_commands.h          | 295 +++++++++++-------
 8 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 221 deletions(-)
 rename {include/linux/mfd => drivers/platform/chrome}/cros_ec_lpc_mec.h (96%)
 rename {include/linux/mfd => drivers/platform/chrome}/cros_ec_lpc_reg.h (94%)

-- 
2.18.0