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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 18:49:22 +0200 From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> To: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org> Cc: lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: cp2112: Remove some dead code Le 30/08/2022 à 13:56, Benjamin Tissoires a écrit : > On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 11:26 AM Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 18 Jun 2022, Christophe JAILLET wrote: >> >>> Commit 13de9cca514e ("HID: cp2112: add IRQ chip handling") has introduced >>> cp2112_allocate_irq() that seems to be unused since 2016. >>> >>> Remove it, remove the associated resources and part of the remove() >>> function that frees the resources allocated in cp2112_allocate_irq(). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> >>> --- >>> Compile tested only. >>> >>> Maybe the issue is completely elsewhere and the probe() should call >>> cp2112_allocate_irq() in some cases. >> >> Benjamin, could you please take a look? Apparently you were aware of the >> code being dead due to the __maybe_unused annotation ... :) What was the >> point? >> > > Looks like I kept that code around for the CI I am running on HID patches. > > IIRC, I left the code in the tree because it might have been useful to > others when they need to declare IRQs on the board. So yes, it is > entirely dead code upstream :/ > > I am applying the following 3 patches on the current master tree to be > able to declare hid-cp2112 as an i2c-hid transport: > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/bentiss/gitlab-kernel-ci/-/tree/master/VM > > Those 3 patches can not be upstreamed because platform drivers are a > dead thing, but I have no other ideas on how I can declare an i2c-hid > device on top of hid-cp2112. Given that we don't have DT on x86_64 > vm, I can not rely on that to have my custom sensor (or maybe I can > but I am not aware of it). > > So unless anybody has a better idea, I won't fight against removing > that code, but it's more convenient for me to have it. > > Cheers, > Benjamin > This was just a clean-up patch. I personally don't really care if applied or not. So, from my POV if it helps, it can stay. On the other side, I guess that it could also easily become another patch in your serie. Do what is best. CJ
Powered by blists - more mailing lists