linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 11/21] swnode: Add support to create early during boot

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:   Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:09:16 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>
Cc:     linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        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>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
        Haibo Xu <haibo1.xu@...el.com>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Atish Kumar Patra <atishp@...osinc.com>,
        Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 11/21] swnode: Add support to create early during
 boot

On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 11:29:06PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> From: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
> 
> swnode framework can be used to create fwnode for interrupt
> controllers.

Why? What is this for?
Can you elaborate? This commit message is poorly written...

And why firmware node is not enough for ACPI case?
I assume the fwnode in DT case is already provided by OF.

> This helps in keeping the drivers same for both
> DT and ACPI. To enable this, enhance the swnode framework so
> that it can be created early during boot without dependency
> on sysfs.

...

> -	swnode->kobj.kset = swnode_kset;
> +	swnode->kobj.kset = (!early) ? swnode_kset : NULL;

Too many unneeded characters. Why parentheses? Why negative check?

...

> +	if (early) {
> +		ret = 0;
> +		kobject_init(&swnode->kobj, &software_node_type_early);
> +		swnode->kobj.parent = parent ? &parent->kobj : NULL;
> +		if (node->name)
> +			ret = kobject_set_name(&swnode->kobj,
> +					       "%s", node->name);
> +		else
> +			ret = kobject_set_name(&swnode->kobj,
> +					       "node%d", swnode->id);
> +		if (!ret) {
> +			spin_lock(&swnode_early_lock);
> +			list_add_tail(&swnode->early, &swnode_early_list);
> +			spin_unlock(&swnode_early_lock);
> +		}
> +	} else {
> +		if (node->name)
> +			ret = kobject_init_and_add(&swnode->kobj, &software_node_type,
> +						   parent ? &parent->kobj : NULL,

This looks like have a duplication.

> +						   "%s", node->name);
> +		else
> +			ret = kobject_init_and_add(&swnode->kobj, &software_node_type,
> +						   parent ? &parent->kobj : NULL,
> +						   "node%d", swnode->id);
> +	}

Maybe it's possible to refactor this piece to be more compact?

...

> -	return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(swnode_register(node, parent, 0));
> +	return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(swnode_register(node, parent, 0, 0));

In one case you use boolean, here is unsigned int for early flag, why is the
inconsistency added?

...

> -struct fwnode_handle *
> -fwnode_create_software_node(const struct property_entry *properties,
> -			    const struct fwnode_handle *parent)
> +static struct fwnode_handle *
> +fwnode_create_software_node_common(const struct property_entry *properties,
> +				   const struct fwnode_handle *parent,
> +				   bool early)

Why would you need this API in early stages?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko