linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 9/9] ipu3-cio2: Add functionality allowing software_node connections to sensors on platforms designed for Windows

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: <4ce5b55f-f492-2b52-5571-86ee346db795@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Oct 2020 23:05:54 +0100
From:   Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.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,
        sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
        pmladek@...e.com, mchehab@...nel.org, tian.shu.qiu@...el.com,
        bingbu.cao@...el.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
        yong.zhi@...el.com, rafael@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        kitakar@...il.com, dan.carpenter@...cle.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 9/9] ipu3-cio2: Add functionality allowing
 software_node connections to sensors on platforms designed for Windows

Hi Andy

On 20/10/2020 10:41, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> +	  	- Some Microsoft Surface models
> Perhaps an example? Like '(e.g. Surface Book)'
>
>> +		- The Lenovo Miix line
> Ditto.
Sure - I'll list them.
>> +static const char * const port_names[] = {
>> +	"port0", "port1", "port2", "port3"
> + comma.
I think 4 ports is the maximum for CIO2 device, so this shouldn't ever
get extended?
>> +	/* device fwnode properties */
>> +	memset(dev_properties, 0, sizeof(struct property_entry) * 3);
> 3 -> sizeof(...) ?
> Same Q to other similar cases.
Whoops, of course, that was stupid in hindsight!
>> +	if (is_software_node(dev_fwnode(&pci_dev->dev)))
> Can we use the same check as for _build call above?

And just set a flag in struct cio2? sure.


For all the other comments; ack - I'll make those changes for the next
version