linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max5970: Rename driver and remove wildcard

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: <0d707cdc-2c6f-6506-71c4-85840a1ad1de@9elements.com>
Date:   Wed, 24 May 2023 15:23:13 +0530
From:   Naresh Solanki <naresh.solanki@...ements.com>
To:     Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mfd: max5970: Rename driver and remove wildcard

Hi Lee,

On 22-05-2023 12:41 pm, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 18 May 2023, Naresh Solanki wrote:
> 
>> Hi Lee,
>>
>> On 18-05-2023 03:44 pm, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Thu, 27 Apr 2023, Naresh Solanki wrote:
>>>
>>>> The previous version of this driver included wildcards in file names
>>>> and descriptions. This patch renames the driver to only support MAX5970
>>>> and MAX5978, which are the only chips that the driver actually supports.
>>>
>>> So multiple devices are supported:
>>>
>>>     MAX5970  ... AND
>>>     MAX5978  ... thus
>>>     MAX597X  ... does make sense, no?
>>>    What are you trying to achieve?
>> Understood. It is important to note that there are indeed other unrelated
>> chips in addition to MAX5970 and MAX5978. Examples include MAX5971, which is
>> a Single-Port, 40W, IEEE 802.3af/at PSE Controller with Integrated MOSFET,
>> and MAX5974A, an Active-Clamped, Spread-Spectrum, Current-Mode PWM
>> Controller, among others.
>>
>> With this change, the intention is to be specific about the chips the driver
>> supports. Instead of using wildcards or a broad "MAX597X" designation, the
>> patch aims to exclusively support the MAX5970 and MAX5978 chips.
> 
> It's a tricky situation when engineers/marketing people name devices in
> a nonsensical manner.  However, "max5970" just as misleading in this
> context as "max597x", thus the patch doesn't improve anything.  It's
> more of a maneuver side-ways.

After considering the feedback received regarding the context of the 
leaf driver for max5970, it has been recommended to specifically use 
"max5970" instead of a general designation like "max597x." However, for 
support related to max5978, the documentation can be referred to.

Therefore, this change is necessary in order to unblock the leaf driver 
and address the feedback received.

Regards,
Naresh
> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Naresh Solanki <Naresh.Solanki@...ements.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/mfd/Kconfig                        |  4 ++--
>>>>    drivers/mfd/simple-mfd-i2c.c               | 18 +++++++++---------
>>>>    include/linux/mfd/{max597x.h => max5970.h} | 16 ++++++++--------
>>>>    3 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>>>    rename include/linux/mfd/{max597x.h => max5970.h} (92%)
>