linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] of/property: Introduce of_fwnode

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:   Tue, 6 Nov 2018 16:28:10 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] of/property: Introduce of_fwnode_name()

On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 07:18:14AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2018 at 6:27 AM Heikki Krogerus
> <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 12:58:03PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 12:50:02PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:17 AM Heikki Krogerus
> > > > <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > +static const char *of_fwnode_name(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +       return to_of_node(fwnode)->name;
> > > >
> > > > I'm trying to get rid of the DT name ptr, so please don't add one. You
> > > > can use of_node_full_name() here instead if "<name>@<unit-address>"
> > > > instead of <name> is fine. Otherwise, you've got to allocate your own
> > > > storage and use "%pOFn" printf specifier.
> > >
> > > If we do this here, we will change a behaviour of the entire set of
> > > of_fwnode_get_named_child_node() users.
> > >
> > > I think this is out of scope of the series.
> 
> No, because you are adding a firmware op for something that's going away.

W/o your below explanation it wasn't obvious.

> 
> > You have a point. We must use the same member that was used in
> > of_fwnode_get_named_child_node().
> >
> > The goal of this series if most likely not clear from this patch
> > alone, so I'll send a second version and make sure to CC the DT list
> > and Rob.
> 
> Looking at patch 4, if matching the name is what you want to do, then
> use the DT name matching functions. They were added in 4.19.

Do you mean of_node_name_eq()?


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko