linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 02/14] of: property: Add fw

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]

Date:   Wed, 19 Jul 2023 15:25:01 -0700
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To:     Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Cc:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/14] of: property: Add fw_devlink support for msi-parent

On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 4:36 AM Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com> wrote:
>
> This allows fw_devlink to create device links between consumers of
> a MSI and the supplier of the MSI.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
> ---
>  drivers/of/property.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c
> index ddc75cd50825..e4096b79a872 100644
> --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> @@ -1325,6 +1325,37 @@ static struct device_node *parse_interrupts(struct device_node *np,
>         return of_irq_parse_one(np, index, &sup_args) ? NULL : sup_args.np;
>  }
>
> +static struct device_node *parse_msi_parent(struct device_node *np,
> +                                           const char *prop_name, int index)
> +{
> +       struct of_phandle_args sup_args;
> +       struct device_node *msi_np;
> +
> +       if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_IRQ))
> +               return NULL;
> +
> +       if (strcmp(prop_name, "msi-parent"))
> +               return NULL;
> +
> +       msi_np = of_parse_phandle(np, prop_name, 0);
> +       if (msi_np) {
> +               if (!of_property_read_bool(msi_np, "#msi-cells")) {
> +                       if (index) {
> +                               of_node_put(msi_np);
> +                               return NULL;
> +                       }
> +                       return msi_np;
> +               }
> +               of_node_put(msi_np);
> +       }
> +
> +       if (of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, prop_name, "#msi-cells", index,
> +                                      &sup_args))
> +               return NULL;
> +
> +       return sup_args.np;
> +}
> +

I'm amazed by the different ways you choose to waste people's time.
Did you even scroll up to see how the other properties are handled?

Why can't this be handled using DEFINE_SIMPLE_PROP macro?

-Saravana

>  static const struct supplier_bindings of_supplier_bindings[] = {
>         { .parse_prop = parse_clocks, },
>         { .parse_prop = parse_interconnects, },
> @@ -1359,6 +1390,7 @@ static const struct supplier_bindings of_supplier_bindings[] = {
>         { .parse_prop = parse_regulators, },
>         { .parse_prop = parse_gpio, },
>         { .parse_prop = parse_gpios, },
> +       { .parse_prop = parse_msi_parent, },
>         {}
>  };
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>