linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5] dmaengine: Loongson1: Add Loongson1 dmaengine driver

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:   Tue, 20 Jul 2021 13:48:48 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kelvin Cheung <keguang.zhang@...il.com>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5] dmaengine: Loongson1: Add Loongson1 dmaengine driver

On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 05:13:53PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On 17-07-21, 19:39, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 17, 2021 at 08:09:45PM +0530, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > On 17-07-21, 18:57, Kelvin Cheung wrote:
> > > > Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org> 于2021年7月14日周三 下午1:14写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > On 04-07-21, 23:33, Keguang Zhang wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > +static struct platform_driver ls1x_dma_driver = {
> > > > > > +     .probe  = ls1x_dma_probe,
> > > > > > +     .remove = ls1x_dma_remove,
> > > > > > +     .driver = {
> > > > > > +             .name   = "ls1x-dma",
> > > > > > +     },
> > > > > > +};
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > +module_platform_driver(ls1x_dma_driver);
> > > > >
> > > > > so my comment was left unanswered, who creates this device!
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry!
> > > > This patch will create the device: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/12281691
> > > 
> > > Greg, looks like the above patch creates platform devices in mips, is
> > > that the right way..?
> > 
> > I do not understand, what exactly is the question?
> 
> So this patch was adding Loongson1 dmaengine driver which is a platform
> device. I asked about the platform device and was told that [1] creates
> the platform device. I am not sure if that is the recommended way given
> that you have been asking people to not use platform devices.

Yes, but this link:

> [1]: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/12281691

Does look like a "real" platform device in that you have fixed resources
for the device and no way to discover it on your own.

But why are you not using DT for this?  That looks like the old platform
data files.

thanks,

greg k-h