linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180924070453.GA7105@kroah.com>
Date:   Mon, 24 Sep 2018 09:04:53 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Silesh C V <svellattu@...sta.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode

On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 12:06:13PM +0530, Silesh C V wrote:
> Hello Greg,
> On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:48 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 10:05:55AM +0530, Silesh C V wrote:
> > > Some drivers need to find the device on a bus having a specific firmware
> > > node. Currently, such drivers have their own implementations to do this.
> > > Provide a helper similar to bus_find_device_by_name so that each driver
> > > does not have to reinvent this.
> >
> > Is there a second patch that uses this function?  We don't add api calls
> > that are not used.
> 
> OK. If I change, say, of_find_i2c_device_by_node,
> of_find_i2c_adapter_by_node, of_phy_find_device and
> of_find_spi_device_by_node to use this API, will that be good enough?
> If that is OK, I will send this as a series in v2.

I have no idea.  Why would you want to create a new api call with no
users?  Let's see the patch series before being able to properly judge
it...

thanks,

greg k-h