linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Input: aw86938

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: <20260205-polar-falcon-of-fame-b8db72@quoll>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 14:13:22 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, 
	Griffin Kroah-Hartman <griffin.kroah@...rphone.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, 
	Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@...rphone.com>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] Input: aw86938 - add driver for Awinic AW86938

On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 11:12:26AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 2/1/26 2:49 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Griffin,
> > 
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 04:51:14PM +0100, Griffin Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >> @@ -717,9 +746,19 @@ static int aw86927_detect(struct aw86927_data *haptics)
> >>  
> >>  	chip_id = be16_to_cpu(read_buf);
> >>  
> >> -	if (chip_id != AW86927_CHIPID) {
> >> -		dev_err(haptics->dev, "Unexpected CHIPID value 0x%x\n", chip_id);
> >> -		return -ENODEV;
> >> +	switch (haptics->model) {
> >> +	case AW86927:
> >> +		if (chip_id != AW86927_CHIPID) {
> >> +			dev_err(haptics->dev, "Unexpected CHIPID value 0x%x\n", chip_id);
> >> +			return -ENODEV;
> >> +		}
> > 
> > If we are able to query chip ID why do we need to have separate
> > compatibles? I would define chip data structure with differences between
> > variants and assign and use it instead of having separate compatible.
> 
> dt-bindings guidelines explicitly call for this, a chipid comparison

No, they don't. If devices offer autodetection, then they are in fact
fully compatible for the SW.

Best regards,
Krzysztof