| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAGETcx8tRP5-TW0REw5gPhLA9qiSvO6W3hvTk-utG1umuJ3M2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:51:55 -0800
From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
Maxim Kiselev <bigunclemax@...il.com>,
Maxim Kochetkov <fido_max@...ox.ru>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>,
Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>,
Martin Kepplinger <martin.kepplinger@...i.sm>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jpb@...nel.org>,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] of: property: Simplify of_link_to_phandle()
On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 10:15 AM Sakari Ailus
<sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Saravana,
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 04:11:36PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > The driver core now:
> > - Has the parent device of a supplier pick up the consumers if the
> > supplier never has a device created for it.
> > - Ignores a supplier if the supplier has no parent device and will never
> > be probed by a driver
> >
> > And already prevents creating a device link with the consumer as a
> > supplier of a parent.
> >
> > So, we no longer need to find the "compatible" node of the supplier or
> > do any other checks in of_link_to_phandle(). We simply need to make sure
> > that the supplier is available in DT.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/of/property.c | 84 +++++++------------------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> > index 134cfc980b70..c651aad6f34b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> > @@ -1062,20 +1062,6 @@ of_fwnode_device_get_match_data(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> > return of_device_get_match_data(dev);
> > }
> >
> > -static bool of_is_ancestor_of(struct device_node *test_ancestor,
> > - struct device_node *child)
> > -{
> > - of_node_get(child);
> > - while (child) {
> > - if (child == test_ancestor) {
> > - of_node_put(child);
> > - return true;
> > - }
> > - child = of_get_next_parent(child);
> > - }
> > - return false;
> > -}
> > -
> > static struct device_node *of_get_compat_node(struct device_node *np)
> > {
> > of_node_get(np);
> > @@ -1106,71 +1092,27 @@ static struct device_node *of_get_compat_node_parent(struct device_node *np)
> > return node;
> > }
> >
> > -/**
> > - * of_link_to_phandle - Add fwnode link to supplier from supplier phandle
> > - * @con_np: consumer device tree node
> > - * @sup_np: supplier device tree node
> > - *
> > - * Given a phandle to a supplier device tree node (@sup_np), this function
> > - * finds the device that owns the supplier device tree node and creates a
> > - * device link from @dev consumer device to the supplier device. This function
> > - * doesn't create device links for invalid scenarios such as trying to create a
> > - * link with a parent device as the consumer of its child device. In such
> > - * cases, it returns an error.
> > - *
> > - * Returns:
> > - * - 0 if fwnode link successfully created to supplier
> > - * - -EINVAL if the supplier link is invalid and should not be created
> > - * - -ENODEV if struct device will never be create for supplier
> > - */
> > -static int of_link_to_phandle(struct device_node *con_np,
> > +static void of_link_to_phandle(struct device_node *con_np,
> > struct device_node *sup_np)
> > {
> > - struct device *sup_dev;
> > - struct device_node *tmp_np = sup_np;
> > + struct device_node *tmp_np = of_node_get(sup_np);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Find the device node that contains the supplier phandle. It may be
> > - * @sup_np or it may be an ancestor of @sup_np.
> > - */
> > - sup_np = of_get_compat_node(sup_np);
> > - if (!sup_np) {
> > - pr_debug("Not linking %pOFP to %pOFP - No device\n",
> > - con_np, tmp_np);
> > - return -ENODEV;
> > - }
> > + /* Check that sup_np and its ancestors are available. */
> > + while (tmp_np) {
> > + if (of_fwnode_handle(tmp_np)->dev) {
> > + of_node_put(tmp_np);
> > + break;
> > + }
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Don't allow linking a device node as a consumer of one of its
> > - * descendant nodes. By definition, a child node can't be a functional
> > - * dependency for the parent node.
> > - */
> > - if (of_is_ancestor_of(con_np, sup_np)) {
> > - pr_debug("Not linking %pOFP to %pOFP - is descendant\n",
> > - con_np, sup_np);
> > - of_node_put(sup_np);
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > - }
> > + if (!of_device_is_available(tmp_np)) {
> > + of_node_put(tmp_np);
> > + return;
> > + }
> >
> > - /*
> > - * Don't create links to "early devices" that won't have struct devices
> > - * created for them.
> > - */
> > - sup_dev = get_dev_from_fwnode(&sup_np->fwnode);
> > - if (!sup_dev &&
> > - (of_node_check_flag(sup_np, OF_POPULATED) ||
> > - sup_np->fwnode.flags & FWNODE_FLAG_NOT_DEVICE)) {
> > - pr_debug("Not linking %pOFP to %pOFP - No struct device\n",
> > - con_np, sup_np);
> > - of_node_put(sup_np);
> > - return -ENODEV;
> > + tmp_np = of_get_next_parent(tmp_np);
> > }
> > - put_device(sup_dev);
> >
> > fwnode_link_add(of_fwnode_handle(con_np), of_fwnode_handle(sup_np));
>
> fwnode_link_add() returns int. Why is the return type of this function
> changed to void?
The return value of fwnode_link_add() was ignored even before this
patch. Since all other reasons for of_link_to_phandle() to fail are
gone, I'm switching it to void.
fwnode_link_add() is ignored because it can only fail due to -ENOMEM.
Not much to do in that case. We do our best and move on.
-Saravana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists