linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: tegra210-quad: add acpi support

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, 30 Nov 2021 17:14:07 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Krishna Yarlagadda <kyarlagadda@...dia.com>
Cc:     Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi: tegra210-quad: add acpi support

30.11.2021 16:05, Mark Brown пишет:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 01:50:07AM +0000, Krishna Yarlagadda wrote:
> 
>>> That said frankly I'd expect this handling of ACPI reset to be pushed into the
>>> reset code, it's obviously not good to be open coding this in drivers when this
>>> looks like it's completely generic to any ACPI object so shouldn't be being
>>> open coded in individual driers especially with the ifdefery.  Shouldn't the
>>> reset API be able to figure out that an object with _RST has a reset control
>>> and provide access to it through the reset API?
> 
>> Common reset apis are not handling _RST. Each driver is implementing
>> _RST method in ACPI and calling from drivers.

I see only two or three other drivers in kernel which do that.

> I can see that.  What I'm saying is that this seems bad and we should
> instead be implementing this in common code.
> 

The ifdefery, that this patch has, shouldn't be needed. We have a
similar ACPI patch for Tegra I2C [1] and it doesn't have that.

[1]
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-tegra/patch/1637859224-5179-1-git-send-email-akhilrajeev@nvidia.com/

I assume this patch could be reworked similarly to the I2C patch.

Agree that should be better to have a common reset driver for ACPI
instead of polluting each driver with a boilerplate code.