linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/18] property: Return true in fwnode_device_is_available for node types that do not implement this operation

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: <7da1d242-b32a-58f5-e50b-15441730aa0f@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 11:12:11 +0800
From:   Bingbu Cao <bingbu.cao@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        devel@...ica.org
Cc:     rjw@...ysocki.net, lenb@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
        wsa@...nel.org, yong.zhi@...el.com, sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com,
        bingbu.cao@...el.com, tian.shu.qiu@...el.com, mchehab@...nel.org,
        robert.moore@...el.com, erik.kaneda@...el.com, pmladek@...e.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com,
        linux@...musvillemoes.dk, kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com,
        jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org,
        laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com,
        jorhand@...ux.microsoft.com, kitakar@...il.com,
        heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/18] property: Return true in fwnode_device_is_available
 for node types that do not implement this operation

Daniel, thanks for your patch.

On 11/30/20 9:31 PM, Daniel Scally wrote:
> Some types of fwnode_handle do not implement the device_is_available()
> check, such as those created by software_nodes. There isn't really a
> meaningful way to check for the availability of a device that doesn't
> actually exist, so if the check isn't implemented just assume that the
> "device" is present.
> 
> Suggested-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
> ---
> Changes since RFC v3:
> 
> 	patch introduced
> 
>  drivers/base/property.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c
> index 4c43d30145c6..a5ca2306796f 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/property.c
> @@ -785,9 +785,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_handle_put);
>  /**
>   * fwnode_device_is_available - check if a device is available for use
>   * @fwnode: Pointer to the fwnode of the device.
> + *
> + * For fwnode node types that don't implement the .device_is_available()
> + * operation, this function returns true.
>   */
>  bool fwnode_device_is_available(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
>  {
> +	if (!fwnode_has_op(fwnode, device_is_available))
> +		return true;

blank line here?

>  	return fwnode_call_bool_op(fwnode, device_is_available);
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_device_is_available);
> 

-- 
Best regards,
Bingbu Cao