linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH leds v1 10/10] leds: ns2: refactor and use struct led_init

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: <20200921140322.GB4828@kw.sim.vm.gnt>
Date:   Mon, 21 Sep 2020 16:03:22 +0200
From:   Simon Guinot <simon.guinot@...uanux.org>
To:     Marek Behun <marek.behun@....cz>
Cc:     linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>,
        Ondřej Jirman <megous@...ous.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Simon Guinot <sguinot@...ie.com>,
        Vincent Donnefort <vdonnefort@...il.com>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH leds v1 10/10] leds: ns2: refactor and use struct
 led_init_data

On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 03:02:08PM +0200, Marek Behun wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 14:53:43 +0200
> Simon Guinot <simon.guinot@...uanux.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 07:14:05PM +0200, Marek Behun wrote:
> > > On Fri, 18 Sep 2020 15:02:06 +0200
> > > Simon Guinot <simon.guinot@...uanux.org> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 01:16:50AM +0200, Marek Behún wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Marek,
> > > >   
> > > > > By using struct led_init_data when registering we do not need to parse
> > > > > `label` DT property nor `linux,default-trigger` property.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Also, move forward from platform data to device tree only:
> > > > > since commit c7896490dd1a ("leds: ns2: Absorb platform data") the
> > > > > platform data structure is absorbed into the driver, because nothing
> > > > > else in the source tree used it. Since nobody complained and all usage    
> > > > 
> > > > Well, I probably should have...
> > > > 
> > > > I am using this driver on the Seagate Superbee NAS devices. This devices
> > > > are based on a x86 SoC. Since I have been unable to get from the ODM the
> > > > LED information written in the ACPI tables, then platform data are used
> > > > to pass the LED description to the driver.
> > > > 
> > > > The support of this boards is not available mainline yet but it is still
> > > > on my todo list. So that's why I am complaining right now :) If it is
> > > > not too much trouble I'd like to keep platform data support in this
> > > > driver.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks in advance.
> > > > 
> > > > Simon
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > Simon, what if we refactored the driver to use fwnode API instead of OF
> > > API? Then if it is impossible for you to write DTS for that device,
> > > instead of platform data you could implement your device via swnode
> > > fwnodes. :)  
> > 
> > Yes. That would be perfect.
> > 
> > Simon
> 
> BTW if you have access to device schematics I could try to write DTS,
> with schematics and the current board source file it should not be that
> hard. But I can't test it, since I don't have the board.

Don't worry, I'll do the writing and the testing of the fwnode in the
x86 board files. This boards are not mainlined yet. So it is my problem.

And actually if you don't have the time I can do the writing of the
fwnode support in the driver as well. And you can just let the driver
with the OF support. That's fine.

But if you are willing to add fwnode support to the driver yourself,
then you are more than welcome to do it. On my side, I can help with
the testing. I can check that the ARM boards ant their DTB are still
supported by the driver. And I can also check the support of the x86
boards with the addition of the fwnode properties.

Simon

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)