linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4 8/8] cpufreq: Add Rust based cpufreq-dt driver

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: <2024071122-escargot-treadmill-6e9a@gregkh>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 16:37:50 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>
Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
	Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
	Manos Pitsidianakis <manos.pitsidianakis@...aro.org>,
	Erik Schilling <erik.schilling@...aro.org>,
	Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@...aro.org>,
	Joakim Bech <joakim.bech@...aro.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 8/8] cpufreq: Add Rust based cpufreq-dt driver

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 03:21:31PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> (2) You require drivers to always implement a "dummy" struct platform_device,
> there is platform_device_register_simple() for that purpose.

No, NEVER do that.  platform devices are only for real platform devices,
do not abuse that interface any more than it already is.

> I think (2) is the preferred option.

No, not at all, sorry.

Use a real device, you have one somewhere that relates to this hardware,
otherwise you aren't controlling anything and then you can use a virtual
device.

Again, do NOT abuse the platform subsystem.  It's one reason I am loath
to even want to allow rust bindings to it.

greg k-h