linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 01/17] spi: add basic support for SPI offloading

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: <b000d3fd-754a-43e8-ab10-82677eeee1d2@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 13:00:08 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>,
	Martin Sperl <kernel@...tin.sperl.org>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 01/17] spi: add basic support for SPI offloading

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 10:33:31PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 05:48:00PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 11:11:23AM -0600, David Lechner wrote:

> > > In this case, we specifically split up the headers so that the only time you
> > > would ever include this header is if you need to call functions in this
> > > namespace (i.e. struct definitions are in linux/spi/offload/types.h which
> > > doesn't import the namespace). So this doesn't actually seem like a problem
> > > to me.

> > Indeed - I can't see any case where a user would need the header without
> > needing the namespace.

> You are looking from the other end. What I'm telling is that anyone who adds
> a header, automatically gets a namespace. What's the point to have namespace
> if it won't easily prevent from (ab)using it in the code. I consider putting
> MODULE_IMPORT_NS() in the headers a bit weird.

Sure, but there's no case where anyone should ever be adding the header
without adding the namespace which does rather sound like the sort of
thing where you should just move the namespace addition to the header.

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