linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] gpiolib: Pass consumer device through to core in devm_fwnode_gpiod_get

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: <Zd-nI9XoYW3hrPXx@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 23:35:31 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpiolib: Pass consumer device through to core in
 devm_fwnode_gpiod_get_index()

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 10:28:07PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 7:57 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:52:53PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > This devm API takes a consumer device as an argument to setup the devm
> > > action, but throws it away when calling further into gpiolib. This leads
> > > to odd debug messages like this:
> > >
> > >  (NULL device *): using DT '/gpio-keys/switch-pen-insert' for '(null)' GPIO lookup
> > >
> > > Let's pass the consumer device down, by directly calling what
> > > fwnode_gpiod_get_index() calls but pass the device used for devm. This
> > > changes the message to look like this instead:
> > >
> > >  gpio-keys gpio-keys: using DT '/gpio-keys/switch-pen-insert' for '(null)' GPIO lookup
> > >
> > > Note that callers of fwnode_gpiod_get_index() will still see the NULL
> > > device pointer debug message, but there's not much we can do about that
> > > because the API doesn't take a struct device.
> >
> > Have you seen this?
> > https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231019173457.2445119-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
> 
> Clearly yes as I queued the first one in that series. The rest did not
> make its way upstream for whatever reason. What is your point? You
> want to respin it?

It was a reply to Stephen. :-)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko