linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: kempld: Switch back to earlier ->init() behavior

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aID6D-1SsJ1ish5_@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2025 18:04:47 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
Cc: "Heijligen, Thomas" <thomas.heijligen@...unet.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Huber, Nico" <Nico.Huber@...unet.com>,
	"michael.brunner@...tron.com" <michael.brunner@...tron.com>,
	"Schumann, Peter" <Peter.Schumann@...unet.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: kempld: Switch back to earlier ->init() behavior

On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 10:56:47AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> 
> > Commit 9e36775c22c7 ("mfd: kempld: Remove custom DMI matching code")
> > removes the ability to load the driver if no matching system DMI data
> > is found. Before this commit the driver could be loaded using
> > alternative methods such as ACPI or `force_device_id` in the absence
> > of a matching system DMI entry.
> 
> You need to Cc the author of this change to give them a say.

Thanks for Cc'ing me.

> > Restore this ability while keeping the refactored
> > `platform_device_info` table.

So, the error will be returned when CONFIG_DMI=n, or there is no matching entry
in the table. And the table only is filled when present in the firmware and kernel
has CONFIG_DMI=y. That's why the original code was iterating via DMI strings in
a custom way. Besides that there is an ACPI enumeration available, which is not
visible directly from that piece and hence no error should be returned if no
matches found.

Now to prevent similar patches (as mine) appear in the future, can we also add
a comment on top of the for-loop to explain all this?

With a comment added, you may add my
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko