linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] Qcom: LLCC/EDAC: Fix base address used for LLCC banks

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: <9238a26e-7c4b-00ca-e097-5574ed75210d@linaro.org>
Date:   Mon, 19 Dec 2022 15:21:58 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>, andersson@...nel.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        bp@...en8.de, tony.luck@...el.com, quic_saipraka@...cinc.com,
        konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, james.morse@....com,
        mchehab@...nel.org, rric@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        quic_ppareek@...cinc.com, luca.weiss@...rphone.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/13] Qcom: LLCC/EDAC: Fix base address used for LLCC
 banks

On 19/12/2022 15:16, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 03:11:36PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 19/12/2022 14:50, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Also, the id table is
>>>>> an overkill since there is only one driver that is making use of it. And
>>>>> moreover, there is no definite ID to use.
>>>>
>>>> Every driver with a single device support has usually ID table and it's
>>>> not a problem...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Are you referring to OF/ACPI ID table? Or something else?
>>
>> No, I refer to the driver ID table (I2C, platform whatever the driver is).
>>
> 
> Yeah, that's what I wanted to avoid here. The ID table makes sense if you have
> a bus like I2C or a separate subsystem but here LLCC is an individual driver.
> So creating a separate ID table is an overkill IMO.

Why this is an overkill? Just few lines and many, many drivers have it.
Even duplicated (for legacy reasons) with OF tables.

ALIAS is not the way to go around ID table because essentially you are
re-implementing it.

Best regards,
Krzysztof