linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 02/13] dpll: Allow registering pin with firmware node

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: <eee9be12-603d-4e8e-92f8-e76728974313@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 14:51:36 +0100
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
 Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
 Grzegorz Nitka <grzegorz.nitka@...el.com>, Petr Oros <poros@...hat.com>,
 Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
 Prathosh Satish <Prathosh.Satish@...rochip.com>,
 Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
 Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
 Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>,
 Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
 Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
 Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>,
 Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 02/13] dpll: Allow registering pin with
 firmware node

On 12/15/25 2:08 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 08:35:01PM +0100, ivecera@...hat.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> On December 12, 2025 12:25:12 PM GMT+01:00, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>>> Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 08:47:45PM +0100, ivecera@...hat.com wrote:
>>>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>>> @@ -559,7 +563,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dpll_netdev_pin_clear);
>>>>   */
>>>> struct dpll_pin *
>>>> dpll_pin_get(u64 clock_id, u32 pin_idx, struct module *module,
>>>> -	     const struct dpll_pin_properties *prop)
>>>> +	     const struct dpll_pin_properties *prop,
>>>> +	     struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
>>>> {
>>>> 	struct dpll_pin *pos, *ret = NULL;
>>>> 	unsigned long i;
>>>> @@ -568,14 +573,15 @@ dpll_pin_get(u64 clock_id, u32 pin_idx, struct module *module,
>>>> 	xa_for_each(&dpll_pin_xa, i, pos) {
>>>> 		if (pos->clock_id == clock_id &&
>>>> 		    pos->pin_idx == pin_idx &&
>>>> -		    pos->module == module) {
>>>> +		    pos->module == module &&
>>>> +		    pos->fwnode == fwnode) {
>>>
>>> Is fwnode part of the key? Doesn't look to me like that. Then you can
>>> have a simple helper to set fwnode on struct dpll_pin *, and leave
>>> dpll_pin_get() out of this, no?
>>
>> IMHO yes, because particular fwnode identifies exact dpll pin, so
>> I think it should be a part of the key.
> 
> The key items serve for userspace identification purposes as well. For
> that, fwnode is non-sense.
> fwnode identifies exact pin, that is nice. But is it the only
> differentiator among other key items? I don't expect so.

 From this point of view, not. I will not touch dpll_pin_get() and rather
use new helper like dpll_pin_fwnode_set(), ok?

Thanks,
Ivan