linux-kernel - Re: [net-next: PATCH 08/12] ACPI: scan: prevent double enumeration of MDIO bus children

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, 22 Jun 2022 09:12:03 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Grzegorz Bernacki <gjb@...ihalf.com>,
        Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>,
        Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
        Samer El-Haj-Mahmoud <Samer.El-Haj-Mahmoud@....com>,
        upstream@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [net-next: PATCH 08/12] ACPI: scan: prevent double enumeration of
 MDIO bus children

On 6/22/22 05:05, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 9:08 PM Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 05:02:21PM +0200, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
>>> The MDIO bus is responsible for probing and registering its respective
>>> children, such as PHYs or other kind of devices.
>>>
>>> It is required that ACPI scan code should not enumerate such
>>> devices, leaving this task for the generic MDIO bus routines,
>>> which are initiated by the controller driver.
>>
>> I suppose the question is, should you ignore the ACPI way of doing
>> things, or embrace the ACPI way?
> 
> What do you mean by "the ACPI way"?
> 
>> At least please add a comment why the ACPI way is wrong, despite this
>> being an ACPI binding.
> 
> The question really is whether or not it is desirable to create
> platform devices for all of the objects found in the ACPI tables that
> correspond to the devices on the MDIO bus.

If we have devices hanging off a MDIO bus then they are mdio_device (and 
possibly a more specialized object with the phy_device which does embedd 
a mdio_device object), not platform devices, since MDIO is a bus in itself.
-- 
Florian