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: <b1909613-38ac-7a5b-aced-c8090d645af8@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Dec 2020 08:46:18 +0000
From:   Dan Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
To:     Bingbu Cao <bingbu.cao@...ux.intel.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

Hi Bingbu

On 01/12/2020 03:12, Bingbu Cao wrote:
> 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?
Sure thing - I'll add one in
>>  	return fwnode_call_bool_op(fwnode, device_is_available);
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(fwnode_device_is_available);
>>