linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] bus: hisi_lpc: Don't guard ACPI IDs with ACPI

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, 5 Jul 2022 17:15:48 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] bus: hisi_lpc: Don't guard ACPI IDs with ACPI_PTR()

On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 5:02 PM John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com> wrote:
> On 05/07/2022 12:43, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > The OF is not guarded, neither ACPI needs.
>
> This doesn't read well.

"The OF is not guarded, neither ACPI needs it."

Better? Otherwise please propose how it can be amended here.

> > The IDs do not depend
> > to the configuration. Hence drop ACPI_PTR() from the code and
> > move ID table closer to its user.
>
> Do you need to explicitly include mod_devicetable.h, which has the
> definition of acpi_device_id?
>
> I saw a similar change for another driver and it was claimed that
> including mod_devicetable.h was required.

Strictly speaking, yes we need mod_devicetable.h. But of.h and acpi.h
include it.

What you have seen is probably dropping of.h and/or acpi.h completely
from the user. In such cases the mod_devicetable.h is compulsory.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko