linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 06/13] arm64: dts: qcom: correct DWC3 node names and unit addresses

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]

Message-ID: <Yr0Yz7UATt0aqvL1@builder.lan>
Date:   Wed, 29 Jun 2022 22:30:23 -0500
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Manu Gautam <mgautam@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] arm64: dts: qcom: correct DWC3 node names and unit
 addresses

On Wed 04 May 08:19 CDT 2022, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
[..]
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> index 692cf4be4eef..6af80a627c3a 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sdm845.dtsi
> @@ -3868,7 +3868,7 @@ usb_1: usb@...8800 {
>  					<&gladiator_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0 &config_noc SLAVE_USB3_0 0>;
>  			interconnect-names = "usb-ddr", "apps-usb";
>  
> -			usb_1_dwc3: dwc3@...0000 {
> +			usb_1_dwc3: usb@...0000 {

Linux uses the dev_name() when identifying each of these controllers in
/sys/class/UDC, as such changing the name here will break existing USB
ConfigFS Gadget users.

We had this fixed for a while, but where forced to revert it.


So I think, in order for us to merge this without breaking AOSP, we'd
need to come up with a way to retain the old UDC name (perhaps a label
property?)

Regards,
Bjorn