linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iio: pressure: driver for Honeywell HSC/SSC series pressure sensors

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: <ZWtU836_yYWgMYZp@sunspire>
Date:   Sat, 2 Dec 2023 18:01:55 +0200
From:   Petre Rodan <petre.rodan@...dimension.ro>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@...il.com>,
        Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>,
        Andreas Klinger <ak@...klinger.de>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] iio: pressure: driver for Honeywell HSC/SSC
 series pressure sensors


Hello!

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 06:24:53PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > > +static int hsc_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> > > > +{
> > > > +	struct iio_dev *indio_dev;
> > > > +	struct hsc_data *hsc;
> > > > +	struct device *dev = &spi->dev;
> > > > +
> > > > +	indio_dev = devm_iio_device_alloc(dev, sizeof(*hsc));
> > > > +	if (!indio_dev)
> > > > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > > > +
> > > > +	hsc = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > > > +	hsc->xfer = hsc_spi_xfer;
> > > 
> > > Also, pass the callback and spi->dev into hsc probe. Easy to use
> > > a container_of() to get back to the struct spi_device *spi  
> > 
> > I'd rather simply pass along the client struct.
> > 
> 
> I don't like the fact it has to be a void *
> 
> The core code has no idea what is in there.  At least we constraint it
> somewhat with a struct device.

but ...
that is the nice part. the core code never needs to know what exactly is behind
that pointer, since it only gets used by the i2c/spi module that provided that
pointer in the first place. I've never seen a better use of void * :)

I could define a

struct client_handle;

in the .h, use a pointer to that that as function argument, do a lot of
castings, but I feel like it's still a void * with extra steps.

cheers,
peter