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: <1a5eb773-d339-512f-7c5d-7ef72edfdc2a@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Aug 2022 11:20:06 +0100
From:   John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        "ACPI Devel Maling List" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH PoC 1/3] ACPI / PNP: Don't add enumeration_by_parent
 devices

On 19/08/2022 10:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>>>> The hisi_lpc driver also creates a platform device serial device for uart,
>>>> which is the actual uart which we want to use - see
>>>> hisi_lpc_acpi_add_child(). That function does not check
>>>> physical_node_count value, but acpi_create_platform_device() does check it.
>>>> So if we were to move hisi_lpc_acpi_add_child() across to use
>>>> acpi_create_platform_device(), then the change in this patch is required to
>>>> not create the PNP binding (so that physical_node_count is not set from
>>>> PNP probe).
>>> Hmm... The flag, as I interpret it, is equal to "the device in
>>> question is a peripheral device to the non-discoverable bus, such as
>>> SPI, I2C or UART". I.o.w. I do not see how PNP suits here. So, from my
>>> point of view it seems like an abuse of the flag. Not sure the current
>>> state of affairs in ACPI glue layer regarding this, though.
>> Sorry, but I'm not following you here. Which flag are you talking about?
> "enumerated by parent".

ok, right. So I thought that PNP0501 was a standard cid to describe 
16550-compat UART which may be on an LPC bus. And a LPC bus is 
non-discoverable, like SPI or I2C, which also use "enumerated by parent".

Indeed, using PNP0501 for hisi lpc UART cid would be without problem, 
apart from the fact that we can't do all the PIO translation (so need 
"enumerated by parent").

Thanks,
john

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ