linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] gpio: sim: new testing module

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, 18 Oct 2021 13:40:18 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Joel Becker <jlbec@...lplan.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jack Winch <sunt.un.morcov@...il.com>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/8] gpio: sim: new testing module

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021 at 10:17:36AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> Implement a new, modern GPIO testing module controlled by configfs
> attributes instead of module parameters. The goal of this driver is
> to provide a replacement for gpio-mockup that will be easily extensible
> with new features and doesn't require reloading the module to change
> the setup.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
> [Andy: Initialize attribute allocated on the heap]
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> [Colin: Fix dereference of free'd pointer config]
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>

Some nit-picks below, up to you to address.

...

> +	ret = gpio_sim_setup_sysfs(chip);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	return 0;

return gpio_sim_...(chip); ?

...

> +

Redundant empty line.

> +CONFIGFS_ATTR_RO(gpio_sim_config_, dev_name);

...

> +

Ditto.

> +CONFIGFS_ATTR_RO(gpio_sim_config_, chip_name);

...

> +

Ditto.

> +CONFIGFS_ATTR(gpio_sim_config_, label);

...

> +

Ditto.

> +CONFIGFS_ATTR(gpio_sim_config_, num_lines);

...

> +

Ditto.

> +CONFIGFS_ATTR(gpio_sim_config_, line_names);

...

> +	fwnode = fwnode_create_software_node(properties, NULL);
> +	if (IS_ERR(fwnode))
> +		return PTR_ERR(fwnode);


> +	fwnode = dev_fwnode(&config->pdev->dev);
> +	platform_device_unregister(config->pdev);
> +	fwnode_remove_software_node(fwnode);

This seems correct, thank you for modifying the code.

...

> +	config->pdev = NULL;
> +	mutex_unlock(&config->lock);

mutex_destroy() ?
Or is it done in the upper level?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko