linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/28] drivers: Consolidate device lookup helpers

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 09:31:56 +0100
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>
To:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     rafael@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/28] drivers: Consolidate device lookup helpers

Greg,

On 24/06/2019 04:23, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 06:53:55PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> We have device iterators to find a particular device matching a criteria
>> for a given bus/class/driver. i.e, {bus,class,driver}_find_device() APIs.
>> The matching criteria is a function pointer for the APIs. Often the lookup
>> is based on a generic property of a device (e.g, name, fwnode, of node pointer
>> or device type) rather than a driver specific information. However, each driver
>> writes up its own "match" function, spilling the similar match functions all
>> over the driver subsystems.
>>
>> Additionally the prototype for the "match" functions accepted by the above APIs
>> have a minute difference which prevents us otherwise sharing the match functions.
>> i.e,
>> 	int (*match)(struct device *dev, void *data) for {bus/driver}_find_device()
>> 	  vs
>> 	int (*match)(struct device *dev, const void *) for class_find_device()
>>
>> If we promote the former to accept a "const void*" parameter, we could share one
>> single match function for all the helpers. This series achieves the following:
>>
>>   a) [Patches 03-05] Unify the prototype for "match" functions accepted by the
>>       device lookup APIs.
> 
> I've applied the first 6 patches of this series to my tree now.  Let's
> see how that goes, and this should give you a more solid base to redo
> the rest of the series off of.

Thanks for that. I will rebase my next version on top your tree sometime soon.

Cheers
Suzuki