linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] media: dvb_dummy_tuner: implement driver skeleton

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:   Thu, 9 Jan 2020 17:43:13 -0300
From:   "Daniel W. S. Almeida" <dwlsalmeida@...il.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, sean@...s.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] media: dvb_dummy_tuner: implement driver skeleton

Hi Greg! Thanks for chiming in.


> As you are a driver, you should never need to call any pr_* calls,
> instead use dev_*().  For this, you can use dev_dbg(), but really, why
> is that even needed except for your debugging bringup.  And for that,
> you can use ftrace, right?  So no need for any printing of anything
> here.
> Again, dev_err() would be proper, but there's no need for any error
> message here.

Let's take these out in v2 then.


> Don't you need to register the tuner ops with something in this
> function?
> Don't you need to unregister the tuner ops in here?

It is my understanding that bridge drivers are the ones responsible for 
this. For instance, I don't see this with either xc4000.c, xc5000.c or 
mt2060.c. I could be wrong, though. Maybe Mauro could clarify this?

What I did miss in this patch was an attach function. Let's also add 
this in v2.


Thanks again,

- Daniel.