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]
Message-ID: <20200807082327.02e8a682@heffalump.sk2.org>
Date:   Fri, 7 Aug 2020 08:23:27 +0200
From:   Stephen Kitt <steve@....org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon/pmbus: use simple i2c probe function

On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 14:48:58 -0700, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On 8/6/20 1:12 PM, Stephen Kitt wrote:
> > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 12:15:55 -0700, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> > wrote:  
> >> On 8/6/20 9:16 AM, Stephen Kitt wrote:  
[...]
> >> Also, I am not convinced that replacements such as
> >>
> >> -	{ "ipsps1", 0 },
> >> +	{ .name = "ipsps1" },
> >>
> >> are an improvement. I would suggest to leave that alone for
> >> consistency (and to make it easier to add more devices to the
> >> various drivers if that happens in the future).  
> > 
> > From reading through all the drivers using id_table, it seems to me that
> > we could do away with driver_data altogether and move all that to
> > driver-local structures, in many cases covering more than just an id. By
> > only initialising the elements of the structure that are really needed, I
> > was hoping to (a) make it more obvious that driver_data isn’t used, and
> > (b) allow removing it without touching all the code again.
> >   
> 
> I don't see it as an improvement to replace a common data structure with
> per-driver data structures. That sounds too much like "let's re-invent
> the wheel over and over again". If that is where things are going, I'd
> rather have it implemented everywhere else first. I am ok with the other
> changes, but not with this.

I agree, and I wasn’t intending on encouraging re-inventing the wheel in each
driver. Let’s focus on probe_new for now...

What did you mean by “to make it easier to add more devices to the various
drivers if that happens in the future”? There are already many drivers with
multiple devices but no driver_data, dropping the explicit driver_data
initialisation doesn’t necessarily make it harder to add devices, does it?

Regards,

Stephen

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ