[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200131061038.GA2180358@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2020 07:10:38 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Jolly Shah <JOLLYS@...inx.com>
Cc: "ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org" <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"matt@...eblueprint.co.uk" <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
"sudeep.holla@....com" <sudeep.holla@....com>,
"hkallweit1@...il.com" <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
"keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
"dmitry.torokhov@...il.com" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>,
Rajan Vaja <RAJANV@...inx.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] firmware: xilinx: Add sysfs interface
On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 11:59:03PM +0000, Jolly Shah wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On 1/27/20, 10:28 PM, "linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org on behalf of Greg KH" <linux-kernel-owner@...r.kernel.org on behalf of gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 11:01:27PM +0000, Jolly Shah wrote:
> > > > > + ret = kstrtol(tok, 16, &value);
> > > > > + if (ret) {
> > > > > + ret = -EFAULT;
> > > > > + goto err;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + ret = eemi_ops->ioctl(0, read_ioctl, reg, 0, ret_payload);
> > > >
> > > > This feels "tricky", if you tie this to the device you have your driver
> > > > bound to, will this make it easier instead of having to go through the
> > > > ioctl callback?
> > > >
> > >
> > > GGS(general global storage) registers are in PMU space and linux doesn't have access to it
> > > Hence ioctl is used.
> >
> > Why not just a "real" call to the driver to make this type of reading?
> > You don't have ioctls within the kernel for other drivers to call,
> > that's not needed at all.
> >
> > these registers are for users and for special needs where users wants
> > to retain values over resets. but as they belong to PMU address space,
> > these interface APIs are provided. They don’t allow access to any
> > other registers.
>
> That's not the issue here. The issue is you are using an "internal"
> ioctl, instead just make a "real" call.
>
> Sorry I am not clear. Do you mean that we should use linux standard
> ioctl interface instead of internal ioctl by mentioning "real" ?
No, you should just make a "real" function call to the exact thing you
want to do. Not have an internal multi-plexor ioctl() call that others
then call. This isn't a microkernel :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists