linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] include: linux: i2c: more helpers for declaring i2c drivers

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:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 10:59:17 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        bgolaszewski@...libre.com, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] include: linux: i2c: more helpers for declaring i2c
 drivers

On 24.06.19 10:44, Wolfram Sang wrote:

> The correct solution is to fix the boot dependency in the affected I2C
> client drivers. That definately needs HW and thorough testing.
> 
> It may also need something better than the current deferred probe. Big
> topic.

So, then the current approach of using subsys_initcall() can't be
changed easily, right now. But planned for the future (or at least
not introducing new caes).

But: how does that conflict w/ just moving the existing redundant
pieces into a helper macro ? The logic stays the same - just using
a shorter notation. (assuming my patch isn't buggy ;-)).

I can add a remark in the function documentation that this shall
only by used in rare cases, and maybe something like "that's just
legacy  - introducing  new caller is most certainly wrong" ;-)


--mtx

-- 
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287