linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] i2c: core: Move client towards fwnode

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: <d51a686c-583a-4fed-81bd-9287459c48fe@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2025 14:34:48 +0300
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
 Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] i2c: core: Move client towards fwnode

Hi Andy,

On 07/04/2025 12:55, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> The struct i2c_board_info has of_node and fwnode members. This is
> quite confusing as they are of the same semantics and it's tend
> to have an issue if user assigns both. Luckily there is only a
> single driver that does this and fix was sent today. Nevertheless
> the series moves the client handling code to use fwnode and deprecates
> the of_node member in the respective documentation.
> 
> Tomi, can you test this series + the patch we discussed earlier so it works as
> expected?

I tested this series, and then tested this series + "[PATCH v1 1/1] 
media: i2c: ds90ub960: Remove of_node assignment". I didn't see anything 
amiss in either case.

Tested-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>

I assume the ds90ub960 patch is the "single driver that does this and 
fix was sent today"? If so, I think that patch could have been included 
in this series as well, there's hardly a chance of conflicts with the 
one liner. And if applied separately, we probably need to apply the 
ub960 patch one kernel version later than this series.

  Tomi

> 
> In v2:
> - covered i2c-core-slave.c where it makes sense
> - covered i2c-core-of.c where it makes sense
> - rebased on top of the latest code base
> 
> Andy Shevchenko (6):
>    i2c: core: Drop duplicate check before calling OF APIs
>    i2c: core: Unify the firmware node type check
>    i2c: core: Switch to fwnode APIs to get IRQ
>    i2c: core: Reuse fwnode variable where it makes sense
>    i2c: core: Do not dereference fwnode in struct device
>    i2c: core: Deprecate of_node in struct i2c_board_info
> 
>   drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c  | 59 ++++++++++++++++++------------------
>   drivers/i2c/i2c-core-of.c    |  1 -
>   drivers/i2c/i2c-core-slave.c | 11 ++++---
>   include/linux/i2c.h          |  2 +-
>   4 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>