linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] platform_device: add devres function region-reqs

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: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:46:29 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@...hat.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, 
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, 
	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>, 
	Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>, Laurentiu Palcu <laurentiu.palcu@....nxp.com>, 
	David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, 
	David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] platform_device: add devres function region-reqs

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:45:31AM +0100, Philipp Stanner wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 10:37 +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > Other than that I indifferent if this is a good idea. There are so many
> > helpers around these functions ...
> 
> Around which, the devres functions in general? There are, but that's
> kind of the point, unless we'd want everyone to call into the lowest
> level region-request functions with their own devres callbacks.
> 
> In any case: What would your suggestion be, should parties who can't
> (without restructuring very large parts of their code) ioremap() and
> request() simultaneously just not use devres? See my patch #2
> Or is there another way to reach that goal that I'm not aware of?

This wasn't a constructive feedback unfortunately and more a feeling
than a measurable criticism. To actually improve the state, maybe first
check what helpers are actually there, how they are used and if they are
suitable to what they are used for.

Having many helpers is a hint that the usage is complicated. Is that
because the situation is complicated, or is this just a big pile of
inconsistency that can be simplified and consolidated?

Also I think there are helpers that take a resource type parameter (as
your function) and others hard code it in the function name. Maybe
unifying that would be nice, too.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)