linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 06/15] i2c: acpi: Assign fwnode for devices created via i2c_acpi_new

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: <20181121141522.GA16476@kuha.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Nov 2018 16:15:22 +0200
From:   Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 06/15] i2c: acpi: Assign fwnode for devices created
 via i2c_acpi_new_device()

Hi guys,

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 03:35:49PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 12:44:27PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

> > I see 2 possible solutions here:
> > 
> > 1) Changing this patch so that i2c_acpi_new_device() does:
> > 
> >         /*
> >          * The fwnode can not be shared between instantiated clients when
> >          * adding device-properties to the instantiated client.
> >          */
> > 	if (!info->properties)
> > 		info->fwnode = acpi_fwnode_handle(adev);
> > 
> > 2) Leave whether info->fwnode should be set or not up to the
> > caller of i2c_acpi_new_device() (info is already passed in as
> > a param). E.g. i2c-multi-instantiate.c could do this (for now,
> > maybe in the future we will also want to add properties for
> > some HIDs).
> > 
> > I think that 1. is the best solution and this is all kernel internal,
> > so we can always revisit this if necessary.
> 
> Heikki told me he has some ideas, but for now I will drop this patch.

I think the only thing that we can do is to assign the ACPI node as the
secondary node to this kind of mfd "cells". It would most likely
require some changes to the apci code in Linux kernel, probable
nothing major, but no driver needs this for now (I think), so we don't
need to worry about it right now.


thanks,

-- 
heikki