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]
Date:   Sun, 19 Mar 2023 08:36:20 +0200
From:   Matti Vaittinen <>
To:     Maxime Ripard <>
Cc:     Matti Vaittinen <>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <>,
        David Airlie <>,
        Daniel Vetter <>, Emma Anholt <>,
        Andy Shevchenko <>,
        Heikki Krogerus <>,
        Maíra Canal <>,
        Javier Martinez Canillas <>,
        Noralf Trønnes <>,,,
        Stephen Boyd <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] kunit: drm/tests: move generic helpers

Hi Maxime & All

First of all - I am sorry. During the last minute rebase I accidentally 
dropped the header file from this series. Will fix that for v5. (Also 
the build bot pointed this mistake).

On 3/17/23 17:09, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> Hi Matti,
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 04:42:25PM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>> The creation of a dummy device in order to test managed interfaces is a
>> generally useful test feature. The drm test helpers
>> test_kunit_helper_alloc_device() and test_kunit_helper_free_device()
>> are doing exactly this. It makes no sense that each and every component
>> which intends to be testing managed interfaces will create similar
>> helpers.
>> Move these functions to place where it is more obvious they can be used
>> also by other subsystems but drm.
>> Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <>
>> ---
>> Please note that there's something similat ongoing in the CCF:
>> I do like the simplicity of these DRM-originated helpers so I think
>> they're worth. I do equally like the Stephen's idea of having the
>> "dummy platform device" related helpers under drivers/base and the
>> header being in include/kunit/platform_device.h which is similar to real
>> platform device under include/linux/platform_device.h - so, in the end
>> of the day I hope Stephen's changes as well as the changes this patch
>> introduces to end up in those files. This, however, will require some
>> co-operation to avoid conflicts.
> I think you would have an easier time if you just copied and renamed
> them into the kunit folder as an preparation series.

Yes. That would simplify the syncing between the trees. It slightly bugs 
me to add dublicate code in kernel-but the clean-up series for DRM users 
could be prepared at the same time. It would be even possible to just 
change the drm-helper to be a wrapper for the generic one - and leave 
the callers intact - although it leaves some seemingly unnecessary 
"onion code" there.

> That way, you wouldn't have to coordinate DRM, CCF and IIO, you'd just
> create new helpers that can be reused/converted to by everyone eventually

Yes. Thanks - I think I may go with this approach for the v5 :)

	-- Matti

Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland

~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~

Powered by blists - more mailing lists