linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/9] software_node: Add support for fwnode

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20201020123556.GW13341@paasikivi.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Oct 2020 15:35:56 +0300
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        linux.walleij@...aro.org, prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com,
        heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
        laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com,
        kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com, jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org,
        robh@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, pmladek@...e.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
        tian.shu.qiu@...el.com, bingbu.cao@...el.com, yong.zhi@...el.com,
        rafael@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, kitakar@...il.com,
        dan.carpenter@...cle.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 4/9] software_node: Add support for
 fwnode_graph*() family of functions

Hi Daniel, Heikki,

Thanks for the patch.

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 11:58:58PM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote:
> From: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> This implements the remaining .graph_* callbacks in the
> fwnode operations vector for the software nodes. That makes
> the fwnode_graph*() functions available in the drivers also
> when software nodes are used.
> 
> The implementation tries to mimic the "OF graph" as much as
> possible, but there is no support for the "reg" device
> property. The ports will need to have the index in their
> name which starts with "port" (for example "port0", "port1",
> ...) and endpoints will use the index of the software node
> that is given to them during creation. The port nodes can
> also be grouped under a specially named "ports" subnode,
> just like in DT, if necessary.
> 
> The remote-endpoints are reference properties under the
> endpoint nodes that are named "remote-endpoint". 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
> Co-developed-by: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
> ---
> changes in v3:
> 	- removed software_node_device_is_available
> 	- moved the change to software_node_get_next_child to a separate
> 	patch
> 	- switched to use fwnode_handle_put() in graph_get_next_endpoint()
> 	instead of software_node_put()
> 
> changes in v2:
> 	- added software_node_device_is_available
> 	- altered software_node_get_next_child to get references
> 	- altered software_node_get_next_endpoint to release references
> 	to ports and avoid passing invalid combinations of swnodes to
> 	software_node_get_next_child
> 	- altered swnode_graph_find_next_port to release port rather than
> 	old
>  drivers/base/swnode.c | 120 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 119 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/swnode.c b/drivers/base/swnode.c
> index 741149b90..3732530ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/swnode.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/swnode.c
> @@ -536,6 +536,120 @@ software_node_get_reference_args(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static struct fwnode_handle *
> +swnode_graph_find_next_port(const struct fwnode_handle *parent,
> +			    struct fwnode_handle *port)
> +{
> +	struct fwnode_handle *old = port;
> +
> +	while ((port = software_node_get_next_child(parent, old))) {

software_node_get_next_child() doesn't drop the reference of the old child
nor gets a reference to the returned node. Should it?

The function to get a named child node does.

It'd be nice if this was aligned. Or am I missing something?

This isn't really a comment on this patch though.

-- 
Kind regards,

Sakari Ailus