linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 03/16] mfd: mfd-core: match device tree node against reg property

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, 08 Jun 2020 17:21:20 +0200
From:   Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 03/16] mfd: mfd-core: match device tree node against
 reg property

Am 2020-06-08 16:24, schrieb Lee Jones:
> On Mon, 25 May 2020, Michael Walle wrote:
>> Am 2020-05-15 12:28, schrieb Lee Jones:
>> > On Thu, 30 Apr 2020, Michael Walle wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Lee,
>> > >
>> > > Am 2020-04-23 19:45, schrieb Michael Walle:
>> > > > There might be multiple children with the device tree compatible, for
>> > > > example if a MFD has multiple instances of the same function. In this
>> > > > case only the first is matched and the other children get a wrong
>> > > > of_node reference.
>> > > > Add a new option to match also against the unit address of the child
>> > > > node. Additonally, a new helper OF_MFD_CELL_REG is added.
> 
> [...]
> 
>> > > > diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/core.h b/include/linux/mfd/core.h
>> > > > index d01d1299e49d..c2c0ad6b14f3 100644
>> > > > --- a/include/linux/mfd/core.h
>> > > > +++ b/include/linux/mfd/core.h
>> > > > @@ -13,8 +13,11 @@
>> > > >  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>> > > >
>> > > >  #define MFD_RES_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof(struct resource))
>> > > > +#define MFD_OF_REG_VALID	BIT(31)
>> >
>> > What about 64bit platforms?
>> 
>> The idea was to have this as a logical number. I.e. for now you may 
>> only
>> have one subdevice per unique compatible string. In fact, if you have 
>> a
>> look at the ab8500.c, there are multiple "stericsson,ab8500-pwm"
>> subdevices. But there is only one DT node for all three of it. I guess
>> this works as long as you don't use phandles to reference the pwm node
>> in the device tree. Or you don't want to use device tree properties
>> per subdevice (for example the "timeout-sec" of a watchdog device).
> 
> This is not a good example, as the "stericsson,ab8500-pwm" is
> legitimate.  Here we are registering 3 potential devices, but only
> instantiating 1 of them.

Mh?

static const struct mfd_cell ab8500_devs[] = {
..
        OF_MFD_CELL("ab8500-pwm",
                     NULL, NULL, 0, 1, "stericsson,ab8500-pwm"),
         OF_MFD_CELL("ab8500-pwm",
                     NULL, NULL, 0, 2, "stericsson,ab8500-pwm"),
         OF_MFD_CELL("ab8500-pwm",
                     NULL, NULL, 0, 3, "stericsson,ab8500-pwm"),
..
}

And in pwm-ab8500.c there are three offsets based on the pdev->id.

Am I missing something here?

-- 
-michael