linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] spi: xilinx: use device property accessors.

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: <3D1B59A7-6E57-4C8C-AA95-EA7AA115264F@nexthop.ai>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 09:47:11 -0800
From: Abdurrahman Hussain <abdurrahman@...thop.ai>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>,
 linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] spi: xilinx: use device property accessors.

> On Jan 19, 2026, at 9:32 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 09:15:40AM -0800, Abdurrahman Hussain wrote:
>>> On Jan 19, 2026, at 8:50 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2026 at 08:47:17AM -0800, Abdurrahman Hussain wrote:
> 
>>>>> Are these bindings appropraite for ACPI systems?
> 
>>>> Yes, the Xilinx IP blocks are memory mapped and work exactly the same on ACPI as they do on DT.
> 
>>> That does not answer the question at all.  Is it appropriate to
>>> configure an ACPI system in this way?
> 
>> I am not sure I understood your question. What do you mean by “appropriate”?
>> This is following the same guidelines as outlined in 
>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/firmware-guide/acpi/enumeration.html
> 
> You are just bindly making the DT properties available as _DSD
> properties on ACPI systems, ACPI is a completely different firmware
> interface with it's own idioms.  Does this interface make any sense on
> ACPI?

From the above link:

"The special DT namespace link device ID, PRP0001, provides a means to use the existing DT-compatible device identification in ACPI…"

The following is an excerpt from 
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.7/firmware-guide/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.html

The _DSD (Device Specific Data) configuration object, introduced in ACPI 5.1, allows any type of device configuration data to be provided via the ACPI namespace. In principle, the format of the data may be arbitrary, but it has to be identified by a UUID which must be recognized by the driver processing the _DSD output. However, there are generic UUIDs defined for _DSD recognized by the ACPI subsystem in the Linux kernel which automatically processes the data packages associated with them and makes those data available to device drivers as "device properties”.

The two settings are just configuration data for the spi-xilinx driver. By switching to generic device_property_ APIs we can re-use the same driver on ACPI based systems where the properties are passed as _DSD.

Is this not appropriate?

Regards,
Abdurrahman