linux-kernel - Re: Implementation of fwnode_operations :: device_get_match

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: <20230301143625.7kdnzujlv4psbhla@skbuf>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2023 16:36:25 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Implementation of fwnode_operations :: device_get_match_data()
 for software nodes?

On Wed, Mar 01, 2023 at 04:33:16PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:44:11AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 12:26:19AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > I believe that there are few reasons for that:
> > > 1) (besides that what Heikki mentioned);
> > > 2) the software nodes only for quirks, seems you are trying to implement
> > > something that should have to be implemented as proper DT / ACPI device node.
> > > 
> > > Can you elaborate why do you need that (as you see no other board file requires
> > > this)?
> > 
> > Trying to keep the answer short while still answering the question.
> 
> Thank you, this is helpful to understand what you want.
> 
> Random idea #N+1 based on what you told is: how about DT / ACPI overlays?
> Random idea #N+2 is: have you considered FPGA approach?
> 
> So, as far as I got it right the device _can_ be considered as hotpluggable
> blackbox with a lot of hardware onboard. This is very much reminds me FPGA
> sitting behind PCIe hotplug capable interface.
> 
> What do we have now there? Can we spread the same approach for your case?
> 
> Because to me board files here looks like a hack.
> 
> P.S.
> Yeah, I know that SPI is not hotpluggable bus per se. It may be that
> we actually need to reboot machine after plugging in/out the device.

Can you please give me some clearer references for #N+1 and #N+2?
I haven't considered either of those options and I'm not sure what that
would entail.