linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CANLsYkxcUvBBFRFD9Vco559Y5LFw=X0H3Lyzm=nFat6z5yH44g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Oct 2018 11:48:19 -0600
From:   Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Silesh C V <svellattu@...sta.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Lijun Ou <oulijun@...wei.com>,
        "Wei Hu(Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@...wei.com>,
        Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@...wei.com>,
        Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@...wei.com>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] Driver core: add bus_find_device_by_fwnode

On Tue, 9 Oct 2018 at 11:39, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 7:27 PM Mathieu Poirier
> <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Silesh,
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 03:47:24PM +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.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Silesh C V <svellattu@...sta.com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes since v2:
> > >       - make use of dev_fwnode in match_fwnode.
> > >
> > >  drivers/base/bus.c     | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  include/linux/device.h |  3 +++
> > >  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/base/bus.c b/drivers/base/bus.c
> > > index 8bfd27e..a2f39db 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/base/bus.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/base/bus.c
> > > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> > >  #include <linux/string.h>
> > >  #include <linux/mutex.h>
> > >  #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> > > +#include <linux/property.h>
> > >  #include "base.h"
> > >  #include "power/power.h"
> > >
> > > @@ -373,6 +374,25 @@ struct device *bus_find_device_by_name(struct bus_type *bus,
> > >  }
> > >  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bus_find_device_by_name);
> > >
> > > +static int match_fwnode(struct device *dev, void *fwnode)
> > > +{
> > > +     return dev_fwnode(dev) == fwnode;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +/**
> > > + * bus_find_device_by_fwnode - device iterator for locating a particular device
> > > + * having a specific firmware node
> > > + * @bus: bus type
> > > + * @start: Device to begin with
> > > + * @fwnode: firmware node of the device to match
> > > + */
> > > +struct device *bus_find_device_by_fwnode(struct bus_type *bus, struct device *start,
> > > +                                     struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
> >
> > I get the following when running checkpatch on your set:
> >
> > mpoirier@...15:~/work/linaro/coresight/kernel-maint$ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl
> > 0001-Driver-core-add-bus_find_device_by_fwnode.patch
> > WARNING: line over 80 characters
>
> Lines longer than 80 chars often are legitimate.  No need to send
> extra reports about those cases in general.

In this case I don't see a reason not to abide to the guideline.
Wrapping the function declaration to 80 characters would be easy
without effecting code readability.

Mathieu

>
> Thanks,
> Rafael