linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/16] PCI: samsung: Rename common functions to samsung

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a8f0cd74-6094-d24a-b126-ea7737e39a01@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2023 12:09:26 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>, lpieralisi@...nel.org,
        kw@...ux.com, robh@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
        jingoohan1@...il.com, Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru,
        lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, hongxing.zhu@....com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        m.szyprowski@...sung.com, jh80.chung@...sung.co,
        pankaj.dubey@...sung.com
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/16] PCI: samsung: Rename common functions to samsung

On 14/02/2023 13:13, Shradha Todi wrote:
> Use samsung instead of exynos for all common functions
> like probe/remove/suspend/resume.
> 
> Suggested-by: Pankaj Dubey <pankaj.dubey@...sung.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shradha Todi <shradha.t@...sung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-samsung.c | 42 ++++++++++++------------
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-samsung.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-samsung.c
> index 719d284e1552..dc8ec0b546fd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-samsung.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-samsung.c
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ struct samsung_pcie {
>  	struct regulator_bulk_data	supplies[2];
>  };
>  
> -static int exynos_pcie_init_clk_resources(struct samsung_pcie *sp)
> +static int samsung_pcie_init_clk_resources(struct samsung_pcie *sp)

Same as before - I don't see here benefit.

>  {
>  	struct device *dev = sp->pci.dev;
>  	int ret;
> @@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ static int exynos_pcie_init_clk_resources(struct samsung_pcie *sp)
>  	return clk_bulk_prepare_enable(sp->clk_cnt, sp->clks);
>  }
>  

(...)

>  
> -static struct platform_driver exynos_pcie_driver = {
> -	.probe		= exynos_pcie_probe,
> -	.remove		= __exit_p(exynos_pcie_remove),
> +static struct platform_driver samsung_pcie_driver = {
> +	.probe		= samsung_pcie_probe,
> +	.remove		= __exit_p(samsung_pcie_remove),
>  	.driver = {
> -		.name	= "exynos-pcie",
> -		.of_match_table = exynos_pcie_of_match,
> -		.pm		= &exynos_pcie_pm_ops,
> +		.name	= "samsung-pcie",

This "name" has some point... but I think it would break now all module
users.

> +		.of_match_table = samsung_pcie_of_match,
> +		.pm		= &samsung_pcie_pm_ops,
>  	},
>  };
> -module_platform_driver(exynos_pcie_driver);
> +module_platform_driver(samsung_pcie_driver);
>  MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");
> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, exynos_pcie_of_match);
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, samsung_pcie_of_match);

Best regards,
Krzysztof