linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] hisi_lpc: Use acpi_dev_for_each

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: <CAHp75VdxaBG8Sj3j7Wa7BrZOrn1j2eAtJMw0N8z255HwMSohYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:05:32 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] hisi_lpc: Use acpi_dev_for_each_child()

On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 1:54 PM John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 01/07/2022 12:07, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 1:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 1:04 PM John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com> wrote:
> >>> On 30/06/2022 19:13, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

...

> >>> However Yang Yingliang spotted a pre-existing bug in the ACPI probe and
> >>> sent a fix today (coincidence?):
> >>>
> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220701094352.2104998-1-yangyingliang@huawei.com/T/#u
> >>>
> >>> And they conflict. This code has been this way for years, so I just
> >>> suggest Yang Yingliang resends the fix on top off Rafael's change.
> >>
> >> Wondering if Yang can actually switch that to use
> >> platform_device_register_full().
>
> Maybe that would work and simplify things. Let me check it.
>
> BTW, when we originally upstreamed this driver there was some ACPI
> platform device registration code which you/we thought could be factored
> out later. I can't remember it. I was looking through lore but couldn't
> find it. I don't remember it being so important, though.

My suggestion is definitely not for the fix itself, but as a follow up.

> > And for the record, I think the Fixes even for very rare bug hits
> > should go first.
>
> ok, I have to admit that I was going to feel awkward asking Rafael to
> deal with this fix by having a v4 on top of it.

I don't think it's a problem as long as we have an immutable branch /
tag with that patch. Another approach could be that Rafael can take it
as a precursor for his series and route via ACPI tree, but let's hear
what he thinks about this himself.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko