linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 7/8] platform/chrome: Introduce device tree hardware prober

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: <CAGXv+5ED7j49ndT7BaESW8ZL7_mjVUJLM_FWma8Lwkg+Uh3saw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 12:56:20 +0800
From: Chen-Yu Tsai <wenst@...omium.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, 
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, 
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, 
	Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>, 
	chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>, 
	Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 7/8] platform/chrome: Introduce device tree hardware prober

On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 11:32 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2024 at 06:29:44PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 03:34:26PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > > +static const struct chromeos_i2c_probe_data chromeos_i2c_probe_dumb_touchscreen = {
> > > +   .cfg = &(const struct i2c_of_probe_cfg) {
> >
> > Perhaps you can introduce something like
> >
> > #define DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG(_type_, _ops_)                \
> >       (struct ...) {                                  \
> >               .ops = _ops_,                           \
> >               .type = #_type_,                        \
> >       }
> >
> > and use it here as
> >
> >       .cfg = DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG(touchscreen, NULL),
> >
> > > +           .type = "touchscreen"
> >
> > Ditto.
>
> This was for leaving trailing comma.

Ack.

> > > +   }
> >
> > Ditto.
> >
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const struct i2c_of_probe_cfg chromeos_i2c_probe_simple_trackpad_cfg = {
> > > +   .ops = &i2c_of_probe_simple_ops,
> > > +   .type = "trackpad"
> >
> > Leave a comma.

Ack

> > > +};
>
> ...
>
> > > +   .cfg = &chromeos_i2c_probe_simple_trackpad_cfg,
> >
> >       .cfg = DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG(trackpad, i2c_of_probe_simple_ops),
> >
> > Or even
> >
> > #define DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG_SIMPLE(_type_)                        \
> >       DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG(type, &i2c_of_probe_simple_ops)

I'm not inclined on using compound literals here. "simple X cfg" will
likely get shared between multiple |chromeos_i2c_probe_data| entries,
and AFAIK the toolchain can't merge them. So we would end up with one
compound literal per entry, even if their contents are the same.

> With that also looking at the above
>
> #define DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG_NONE(_type_)                            \
>         DEFINE_I2C_OF_PROBE_CFG(type, NULL)

For the "dumb" case it makes sense though, since it would be one instance
per type. But we could go further and just wrap the whole
|chromeos_i2c_probe_data| declaration.


ChenYu