linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] firmware: arm_scmi: Add names to scmi devices created

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <22634361-320b-e08e-d7f2-34a95038e838@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Dec 2019 18:26:42 +0000
From:   Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] firmware: arm_scmi: Add names to scmi devices
 created

Hi

On 10/12/2019 14:53, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Now that scmi bus provides option to create named scmi device, let us
> create the default devices with names. This will help to add names for
> matching to respective drivers and eventually to add multiple devices
> and drivers per protocol.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> index 2952fcd8dd8a..0bbdc7c9eb0f 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c
> @@ -829,6 +829,40 @@ scmi_create_protocol_device(struct device_node *np, struct scmi_info *info,
>  	scmi_set_handle(sdev);
>  }
> 
> +#define MAX_SCMI_DEV_PER_PROTOCOL	2
> +struct scmi_prot_devnames {
> +	int protocol_id;
> +	char *names[MAX_SCMI_DEV_PER_PROTOCOL];
> +};
> +
> +static struct scmi_prot_devnames devnames[] = {
> +	{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_POWER,  { "genpd" },},
> +	{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_PERF,   { "cpufreq" },},
> +	{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_CLOCK,  { "clocks" },},
> +	{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_SENSOR, { "hwmon" },},
> +	{ SCMI_PROTOCOL_RESET,  { "reset" },},
> +};
> +
> +static inline void
> +scmi_create_protocol_devices(struct device_node *np, struct scmi_info *info,
> +			     int prot_id)
> +{
> +	int loop, cnt;
> +
> +	for (loop = 0; loop < ARRAY_SIZE(devnames); loop++) {
> +		if (devnames[loop].protocol_id != prot_id)
> +			continue;
> +
> +		for (cnt = 0; cnt < ARRAY_SIZE(devnames[loop].names); cnt++) {
> +			const char *name = devnames[loop].names[cnt];
> +
> +			if (name)
> +				scmi_create_protocol_device(np, info, prot_id,
> +							    name);
> +		}
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	int ret;
> @@ -897,7 +931,7 @@ static int scmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			continue;
>  		}
> 
> -		scmi_create_protocol_device(child, info, prot_id, NULL);
> +		scmi_create_protocol_devices(child, info, prot_id);
>  	}
> 
>  	return 0;
> --
> 2.17.1
> 

I'm a little bit puzzled by the builtin fixed define MAX_SCMI_DEV_PER_PROTOCOL, but
I have not really an alternative solution as of now, so looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>

Cheers

Cristian