linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] serial: 8250_omap: Drop check for of

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: <dbc00a69-2144-6e30-e9b1-4f8ee272ab8a@ti.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 18:54:27 +0530
From:   Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com>
To:     Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
        Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
        <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] serial: 8250_omap: Drop check for of_node


On 10-Jan-19 5:37 PM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 01:44:03PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com> [190109 09:11]:
>>> 8250_omap is DT only driver so dev->of_node always exists. Drop check
>>> for existence of valid dev->of_node to simplify omap8250_probe().
>>
>> That part seems safe to me now.
>>
>>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
>> ...
>>> -		const struct of_device_id *id;
>>> -
>>> -		ret = of_alias_get_id(pdev->dev.of_node, "serial");
>>> -
>>> -		of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "clock-frequency",
>>> -				     &up.port.uartclk);
>>> -		priv->wakeirq = irq_of_parse_and_map(pdev->dev.of_node, 1);
>>> -
>>> -		id = of_match_device(of_match_ptr(omap8250_dt_ids), &pdev->dev);
>>> -		if (id && id->data)
>>> -			priv->habit |= *(u8 *)id->data;
>>
>> But this part it seems we still need to keep around
>> as we still have lots of clock-frequency references
>> in the *.dtsi files. Or am I missing something?
> 
> It's re-added a couple of lines later. Only the indent was removed.
> 

That's right. You beat me to it. Thanks :)

Regards
Vignesh