linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add software node support to regulator framework

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: <20210713152454.GC4098@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jul 2021 16:24:54 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Mark Gross <mgross@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add software node support to regulator framework

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 12:32:26AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote:

> I do think it can simplify driver code too; a lot of them aren't written
> to parse platform data to get the init data, as they're just relying on
> reading it from devicetree so in the event that we get more cases like
> this, we need to modify those drivers to look for platform data too. On
> the other hand, even the drivers that don't directly call
> of_get_regulator_init_data() still do that lookup during the
> regulator_of_get_init_data() call in regulator_register(), so the ones
> that do parse platform data for init_data structs will check DT as part
> of regulator_register() anyway. Imitating that seems simpler to me.

The driver code is trivial boilerplate, assuming someone doesn't go and
implement a helper to register stuff separately like I suggested.  The
proposed swnode stuff would involve duplicating the DT parsing code.
This seems like a whole lot of effort for something that provides a
worse result than either of the existing things.

> It also creates some problems to suppress the enumeration of the i2c
> device via ACPI (which we'll have to do in a machine specific fashion,
> because some laptops have this chip with properly configured ACPI and

To be clear I think that's a terrible idea.

> > down to being another data table, I imagine you could write a helper for
> > it, or probably even come up with some generic thing that let you
> > register a platform data/DMI combo independently of the driver to get it
> > out of the driver code (looking more like the existing GPIO code which
> > is already being used in another bit of this quirking).

> The advantage of the GPIO lookups is there's no need to have the pointer
> to the registered devices to register the lookup table; we could imitate
> that, by adding entries to a list with the lookup values being device
> and regulator name (with the init data as the thing that's "looked up")
> and check for those during regulator_register() maybe?

Like I keep saying I think that's a much better approach than trying to
use swnodes, they just seem like a terrible fit for the problem.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)