linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] gpiolib: acpi: Split quirks to its own file

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20250515093124.GV88033@black.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 12:31:24 +0300
From: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Mika Westerberg <westeri@...nel.org>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/4] gpiolib: acpi: Split quirks to its own file

On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:58:33AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:47:27AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:41:59AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:34:51AM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 15, 2025 at 11:04:22AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 06:59:55PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
> > > > > That's might be the next step to have for all of them, but these are ACPI
> > > > > specific. In any case they can't be put to gpiolib-quirks.c due to module
> > > > > parameters. If we do that we will need a dirty hack to support old module
> > > > > parameters (see 8250 how it's done there, and even author of that didn't like
> > > > > the approach).
> > > > 
> > > > Hmm, how does it affect module paremeters? I thought they are
> > > > gpiolib.something as all these object files are linked to it?
> > > 
> > > gpiolib_acpi.FOO because the object file is gpiolib-acpi.o.
> > 
> > Ah okay.
> > 
> > > > At least can we drop the gpiolib-acpi-core.c rename?
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately no due to the above.
> > 
> > This does not work?
> > 
> > gpiolib-acpi-y                 := gpiolib-acpi.o gpiolib-acpi-quirks.o
> 
> No. You can't use the same name on left and right parts.

I see :( Okay then I guess there are no other options than name it like
this.

[ Ideally we would drop the while gpiolib- prefix from all these so you have
acpi.c, sysfs.c and so on without the redundancy but that's outside of
scope of this work anyways ;-) ]

Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>