linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] usb: typec: Separate USB Power Delivery from USB Type-C

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:   Wed, 27 Apr 2022 10:50:35 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Benson Leung <bleung@...gle.com>,
        Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>,
        Jameson Thies <jthies@...gle.com>,
        "Regupathy, Rajaram" <rajaram.regupathy@...el.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Won Chung <wonchung@...gle.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] usb: typec: Separate USB Power Delivery from USB
 Type-C

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 11:17:49AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 09:30:30AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > "struct pd" is just about the shortest structure name I've seen in the
> > > > kernel so far.  How about using some more letters?  :)
> > > 
> > > Okay, I'll make it usbpd.
> > 
> > How about some more vowels: "struct usb_power_delivery" please.  This
> > isn't the 1980's :)
> 
> "struct usb_power_delivery" is fine, but I would still really really
> want to use "struct usbpd_capabilities" instead of
> "struct usb_power_delivery_capabilities" - it's just too long.
> Is that okay?

Nah, spell it out please, we don't use "usbpd" anywhere, and again, we
don't have a limit of characters.  Most editors should auto-complete
anyway :)

> > > > The kobject question above goes to the code as well.  You are creating a
> > > > bunch of raw kobjects still, why?  This should all fit into the driver
> > > > model and kobjects shouldn't be needed.  Are you trying to nest too deep
> > > > in the attributes?  If so, kobjects will not work as userspace tools
> > > > will not realize they are there and are attributes at all.
> > > 
> > > They are not raw kobjects, they are all devices now. That header just
> > > needs to be fixed.
> > 
> > You have loads of kobject attributes in the .c file.  Either I read it
> > wrong, or you are doing something wrong, as that should never be the
> > case for a driver or device.
> 
> Hmm, I'm probable still doing something wrong...

All of your sysfs callbacks should have a struct device, not a kobject.
You might just be getting lucky in that we are casting around a pointer
of the correct layout.  But the compiler should have caught that
somewhere, please look into it.

thanks,

greg k-h