linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: remove extra

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: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 14:00:39 +0100
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>, 
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gpiolib: remove extra_checks

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 1:52 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:26:03AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 4:28 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 3:03 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 09:11:02PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > extra_checks is only used in a few places. It also depends on
> > > >
> > > > > a non-standard DEBUG define one needs to add to the source file.
> > > >
> > > > Huh?!
> > > >
> > > > What then CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO is about?
> > >
> > > Yeah that is some helper DBrownell added because like me he could
> > > never figure out how to pass -DDEBUG to a single file on the command
> > > line and besides gpiolib is several files. I added the same to pinctrl
> > > to get core debug messages.
> > >
> > > I guess Bartosz means extra_checks is == a non-standard DEBUG
> > > define.
>
> I agree on this statement.
>
> > Defining DEBUG makes sense to
> > enable dev_dbg() messages.
>
> Exactly!
>
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO is used by one driver
>
> By all drivers which are using pr_debug() / dev_dbg().
> I am using it a lot in my development process (actually I have it enabled
> in all my kernel configurations).
>

I'm not saying we should remove it. It'll stay defined in the Makefile
and remain seamless for debug messages. I just want to get rid of that
ugly extra_checks variable which has very little impact.

> > to enable code that can lead to undefined behavior (should it maybe be
> > #if 0?).
>
> I don't know what you are talking about here.
>

I'm talking about drivers/gpio/gpio-tps65219.c and its usage of
CONFIG_DEBUG_GPIO.

Bart

> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>