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, 26 Oct 2020 03:42:06 +0000
From:   "Wu, Hao" <hao.wu@...el.com>
To:     "Xu, Yilun" <yilun.xu@...el.com>,
        "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "mdf@...nel.org" <mdf@...nel.org>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "trix@...hat.com" <trix@...hat.com>,
        "lgoncalv@...hat.com" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 3/6] fpga: dfl: add an API to get the base device for
 dfl device

> Subject: [RFC PATCH 3/6] fpga: dfl: add an API to get the base device for dfl
> device
> 
> This patch adds an API for dfl devices to find which physical device
> owns the DFL.
> 
> This patch makes preparation for supporting DFL Ether Group private
> feature driver. It uses this information to determine which retimer
> device physically connects to which ether group.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/fpga/dfl.c  | 9 +++++++++
>  include/linux/dfl.h | 1 +
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/fpga/dfl.c b/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
> index ca3c678..52d18e6 100644
> --- a/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
> +++ b/drivers/fpga/dfl.c
> @@ -558,6 +558,15 @@ int dfl_dev_get_vendor_net_cfg(struct dfl_device
> *dfl_dev)
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dfl_dev_get_vendor_net_cfg);
> 
> +struct device *dfl_dev_get_base_dev(struct dfl_device *dfl_dev)
> +{
> +	if (!dfl_dev || !dfl_dev->cdev)
> +		return NULL;
> +
> +	return dfl_dev->cdev->parent;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dfl_dev_get_base_dev);

It may confuse people that this get doesn't require a put operation on
the base device. could we avoid this by using a different name?

And why it needs to know the physical device here? DFL hides the
physical device for upper layer drivers, so this is not the same case?
or cdev can be used instead here?

Thanks
Hao

> +
>  #define is_header_feature(feature) ((feature)->id ==
> FEATURE_ID_FIU_HEADER)
> 
>  /**
> diff --git a/include/linux/dfl.h b/include/linux/dfl.h
> index 5ee2b1e..dd313f2 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dfl.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dfl.h
> @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ struct dfl_driver {
>  #define to_dfl_drv(d) container_of(d, struct dfl_driver, drv)
> 
>  int dfl_dev_get_vendor_net_cfg(struct dfl_device *dfl_dev);
> +struct device *dfl_dev_get_base_dev(struct dfl_device *dfl_dev);
> 
>  /*
>   * use a macro to avoid include chaining to get THIS_MODULE.
> --
> 2.7.4

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ