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  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]
Date:	Fri, 08 May 2015 13:27:00 -0700
From:	santosh shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC:	Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>,
	lenb@...nel.org, catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
	thomas.lendacky@....com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	davem@...emloft.net, arnd@...db.de, msalter@...hat.com,
	hanjun.guo@...aro.org, al.stone@...aro.org,
	grant.likely@...aro.org, leo.duran@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V3 PATCH 3/5] device property: Introduces device_dma_is_coherent()

On 5/8/2015 1:49 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, May 07, 2015 09:12:00 PM santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com wrote:
>> On 5/7/15 5:37 PM, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
>>> Currently, device drivers, which support both OF and ACPI,
>>> need to call two separate APIs, of_dma_is_coherent() and
>>> acpi_dma_is_coherent()) to determine device coherency attribute.
>>>
>>> This patch simplifies this process by introducing a new device
>>> property API, device_dma_is_coherent(), which calls the appropriate
>>> interface based on the booting architecture.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@....com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/base/property.c  | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>    include/linux/property.h |  2 ++
>>>    2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/property.c b/drivers/base/property.c
>>> index 1d0b116..8123c6e 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/base/property.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/base/property.c
>>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>>>    #include <linux/export.h>
>>>    #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>>    #include <linux/of.h>
>>> +#include <linux/of_address.h>
>>>    #include <linux/property.h>
>>>
>>>    /**
>>> @@ -519,3 +520,14 @@ unsigned int device_get_child_node_count(struct device *dev)
>>>    	return count;
>>>    }
>>>    EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_get_child_node_count);
>>> +
>>> +bool device_dma_is_coherent(struct device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> +	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) && dev->of_node)
>>
>> Do you really need that IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) ?
>> In other words, dev->of_node should be null for !CONFIG_OF
>
> Yes, but IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF) causes the check to be optimized away by the
> compiler if CONFIG_OF is not enabled.
>
Sure but my point was why you need it when just 'dev->of_node' check
is enough. May be I missed something.

Regards,
Santosh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists