linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 06/13] iio: dac: ds4424: use device match data for chip info

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: <aYIMgEEDd8ZfLv71@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 16:56:00 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
	David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/13] iio: dac: ds4424: use device match data for
 chip info

On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 01:00:02PM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 01:51:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 11:17:42AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 12:03:23PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2026 at 10:34:26AM +0100, Oleksij Rempel wrote:

...

> > > > > -	indio_dev->name = id->name;
> > > > 
> > > > > +	indio_dev->name = client->name;
> > > > 
> > > > Isn't this an ABI breakage?
> > > 
> > > I can't confirm it.
> > > 
> > > before all patches:
> > > root@...troKit:~ cat /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:device3/name 
> > > ds4424
> > > 
> > > after:
> > > root@...troKit:~ cat /sys/bus/iio/devices/iio:device3/name 
> > > ds4424
> > 
> > In ACPI case it might look differently, but I have no means to test this.
> > 
> > id->name comes strictly from an i2c table, while client->name is constructed
> > using specifics of the firmware enumeration. In DT due to some (historical?)
> > reasons the client->name has no vendor substring and hence matches 1:1 to
> > id->name. In ACPI, IIRC, the client->name is ACPI device instance name,
> > something like ABCD0123:00.
> 
> Ok, I see. Should I revert this line?

Just do not introduce that change (change of the ->name field) in the original
patch, in that case no revert churn would be needed.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko