linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] dmaengine: Use dma_request_channel() instead of __dma_request

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: <ZwVn7witZ3Bt8ktu@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 20:12:15 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	imx@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] dmaengine: Use dma_request_channel() instead of
 __dma_request_channel()

On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 12:01:22PM -0400, Frank Li wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 07, 2024 at 06:06:46PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Let's reduce the surface of the use of __dma_request_channel().
> > Hopefully we can make it internall to the DMA drivers or kill for good
> > completely.
> 
> Suggest:
> 
> Reduce use internal __dma_request_channel() function in public
> dmaengine.h

Okay.

> I think this change is okay, but I hope the following patches, which make
> __dma_request_channel() as internal only. otherwise, it looks not necessary.

As explained in the commit message it's the first baby step to this
direction. But sure, when I have more time I'll continue. In any case
I think this change is good on this own as it shows the use inside the
header.  The people who want to have an example of the use may wrongly
take the existing code as "good to go" and this even might pass the
review somewhere. That said, it's not only reducing the use, but has an
educational purpose as well.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko