* [PATCH 0/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
@ 2017-09-16 0:35 john.hubbard
2017-09-16 0:35 ` [PATCH 1/1] " john.hubbard
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: john.hubbard @ 2017-09-16 0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML, Rob Herring, Sakari Ailus, Mika Westerberg,
Rafael J . Wysocki
Cc: John Hubbard
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Hi everyone,
I really don't know for sure which fix is going to be preferred--the
following patch, or just an obvious one-line fix that changes
DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS() so that it invokes EXPORT_SYMBOL, instead of
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL. I explained the reasoning in PATCH 1/1, anyway, so
please see what you think.
John Hubbard (1):
acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
drivers/acpi/property.c | 13 +++++++++++++
include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 18 ++++--------------
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
--
2.14.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
2017-09-16 0:35 [PATCH 0/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations john.hubbard
@ 2017-09-16 0:35 ` john.hubbard
2017-09-18 10:50 ` Sakari Ailus
2017-09-19 7:44 ` Mika Westerberg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: john.hubbard @ 2017-09-16 0:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: LKML, Rob Herring, Sakari Ailus, Mika Westerberg,
Rafael J . Wysocki
Cc: John Hubbard
From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Due to commit db3e50f3234b ("device property: Get rid of struct
fwnode_handle type field"), ACPI_HANDLE() inadvertently became
a GPL-only call. The call path that led to that was:
ACPI_HANDLE()
ACPI_COMPANION()
to_acpi_device_node()
is_acpi_device_node()
acpi_device_fwnode_ops
DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_device_fwnode_ops);
...and the new DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS() includes
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, whereas previously it was a static struct.
In order to avoid changing any of that, let's instead provide ever
so slightly better encapsulation of those struct fwnode_operations
instances. Those do not really need to be directly used in
inline function calls in header files. Simply moving two small
functions (is_acpi_device_node and is_acpi_data_node) out of
acpi_bus.h, and into a .c file, does that.
That leaves the internals of struct fwnode_operations as GPL-only
(which I think was the intent all along), but un-breaks any driver
code out there that relies on the ACPI subsystem's being (historically)
an EXPORT_SYMBOL-usable system. By that, I mean, ACPI_HANDLE() and
other basic ACPI calls were non-GPL-protected.
Also, while I'm there, remove a tiny bit of redundancy that was missed
in the earlier commit, by having is_acpi_node() use the other two
routines, instead of checking fwnode directly.
Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
---
drivers/acpi/property.c | 13 +++++++++++++
include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 18 ++++--------------
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/property.c b/drivers/acpi/property.c
index c1c216163de3..1e3c2517a1ac 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/property.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c
@@ -1293,3 +1293,16 @@ static int acpi_fwnode_graph_parse_endpoint(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_device_fwnode_ops);
DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_data_fwnode_ops);
const struct fwnode_operations acpi_static_fwnode_ops;
+
+bool is_acpi_device_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
+{
+ return !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode) &&
+ fwnode->ops == &acpi_device_fwnode_ops;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(is_acpi_device_node);
+
+bool is_acpi_data_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
+{
+ return !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode) && fwnode->ops == &acpi_data_fwnode_ops;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(is_acpi_data_node);
diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
index dedf9d789166..fa1505292f6c 100644
--- a/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
+++ b/include/acpi/acpi_bus.h
@@ -399,17 +399,12 @@ extern const struct fwnode_operations acpi_device_fwnode_ops;
extern const struct fwnode_operations acpi_data_fwnode_ops;
extern const struct fwnode_operations acpi_static_fwnode_ops;
+bool is_acpi_device_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode);
+bool is_acpi_data_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode);
+
static inline bool is_acpi_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
{
- return !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode) &&
- (fwnode->ops == &acpi_device_fwnode_ops
- || fwnode->ops == &acpi_data_fwnode_ops);
-}
-
-static inline bool is_acpi_device_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
-{
- return !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode) &&
- fwnode->ops == &acpi_device_fwnode_ops;
+ return (is_acpi_device_node(fwnode) || is_acpi_data_node(fwnode));
}
#define to_acpi_device_node(__fwnode) \
@@ -422,11 +417,6 @@ static inline bool is_acpi_device_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
NULL; \
})
-static inline bool is_acpi_data_node(const struct fwnode_handle *fwnode)
-{
- return !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(fwnode) && fwnode->ops == &acpi_data_fwnode_ops;
-}
-
#define to_acpi_data_node(__fwnode) \
({ \
typeof(__fwnode) __to_acpi_data_node_fwnode = __fwnode; \
--
2.14.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
2017-09-16 0:35 ` [PATCH 1/1] " john.hubbard
@ 2017-09-18 10:50 ` Sakari Ailus
2017-09-19 7:44 ` Mika Westerberg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Sakari Ailus @ 2017-09-18 10:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: john.hubbard
Cc: LKML, Rob Herring, Mika Westerberg, Rafael J . Wysocki,
John Hubbard
Hi John,
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 05:35:27PM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>
> Due to commit db3e50f3234b ("device property: Get rid of struct
> fwnode_handle type field"), ACPI_HANDLE() inadvertently became
> a GPL-only call. The call path that led to that was:
>
> ACPI_HANDLE()
> ACPI_COMPANION()
> to_acpi_device_node()
> is_acpi_device_node()
> acpi_device_fwnode_ops
> DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_device_fwnode_ops);
>
> ...and the new DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS() includes
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, whereas previously it was a static struct.
>
> In order to avoid changing any of that, let's instead provide ever
> so slightly better encapsulation of those struct fwnode_operations
> instances. Those do not really need to be directly used in
> inline function calls in header files. Simply moving two small
> functions (is_acpi_device_node and is_acpi_data_node) out of
> acpi_bus.h, and into a .c file, does that.
>
> That leaves the internals of struct fwnode_operations as GPL-only
> (which I think was the intent all along), but un-breaks any driver
> code out there that relies on the ACPI subsystem's being (historically)
> an EXPORT_SYMBOL-usable system. By that, I mean, ACPI_HANDLE() and
> other basic ACPI calls were non-GPL-protected.
Works for me.
Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
OF appears to have the same effective change; Rob: let me know if you'd
like me to send a patch for that, or whether this is preferred. On OF both
appear to be used (EXPORT_SYMBOL / EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL).
--
Regards,
Sakari Ailus
sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
2017-09-16 0:35 ` [PATCH 1/1] " john.hubbard
2017-09-18 10:50 ` Sakari Ailus
@ 2017-09-19 7:44 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-09-19 20:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mika Westerberg @ 2017-09-19 7:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: john.hubbard
Cc: LKML, Rob Herring, Sakari Ailus, Rafael J . Wysocki, John Hubbard
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 05:35:27PM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>
> Due to commit db3e50f3234b ("device property: Get rid of struct
> fwnode_handle type field"), ACPI_HANDLE() inadvertently became
> a GPL-only call. The call path that led to that was:
>
> ACPI_HANDLE()
> ACPI_COMPANION()
> to_acpi_device_node()
> is_acpi_device_node()
> acpi_device_fwnode_ops
> DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_device_fwnode_ops);
>
> ...and the new DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS() includes
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, whereas previously it was a static struct.
>
> In order to avoid changing any of that, let's instead provide ever
> so slightly better encapsulation of those struct fwnode_operations
> instances. Those do not really need to be directly used in
> inline function calls in header files. Simply moving two small
> functions (is_acpi_device_node and is_acpi_data_node) out of
> acpi_bus.h, and into a .c file, does that.
>
> That leaves the internals of struct fwnode_operations as GPL-only
> (which I think was the intent all along), but un-breaks any driver
> code out there that relies on the ACPI subsystem's being (historically)
> an EXPORT_SYMBOL-usable system. By that, I mean, ACPI_HANDLE() and
> other basic ACPI calls were non-GPL-protected.
>
> Also, while I'm there, remove a tiny bit of redundancy that was missed
> in the earlier commit, by having is_acpi_node() use the other two
> routines, instead of checking fwnode directly.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
2017-09-19 7:44 ` Mika Westerberg
@ 2017-09-19 20:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-09-20 8:34 ` Mika Westerberg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2017-09-19 20:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mika Westerberg, john.hubbard, Sakari Ailus
Cc: LKML, Rob Herring, Rafael J . Wysocki, John Hubbard
On Tuesday, September 19, 2017 9:44:00 AM CEST Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 05:35:27PM -0700, john.hubbard@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
> >
> > Due to commit db3e50f3234b ("device property: Get rid of struct
> > fwnode_handle type field"), ACPI_HANDLE() inadvertently became
> > a GPL-only call. The call path that led to that was:
> >
> > ACPI_HANDLE()
> > ACPI_COMPANION()
> > to_acpi_device_node()
> > is_acpi_device_node()
> > acpi_device_fwnode_ops
> > DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS(acpi_device_fwnode_ops);
> >
> > ...and the new DECLARE_ACPI_FWNODE_OPS() includes
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, whereas previously it was a static struct.
> >
> > In order to avoid changing any of that, let's instead provide ever
> > so slightly better encapsulation of those struct fwnode_operations
> > instances. Those do not really need to be directly used in
> > inline function calls in header files. Simply moving two small
> > functions (is_acpi_device_node and is_acpi_data_node) out of
> > acpi_bus.h, and into a .c file, does that.
> >
> > That leaves the internals of struct fwnode_operations as GPL-only
> > (which I think was the intent all along), but un-breaks any driver
> > code out there that relies on the ACPI subsystem's being (historically)
> > an EXPORT_SYMBOL-usable system. By that, I mean, ACPI_HANDLE() and
> > other basic ACPI calls were non-GPL-protected.
> >
> > Also, while I'm there, remove a tiny bit of redundancy that was missed
> > in the earlier commit, by having is_acpi_node() use the other two
> > routines, instead of checking fwnode directly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>
>
> Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
>
OK, applied.
Side note: I'm slightly unhappy with the number of checks in the
ACPI_COMPANION() path.
Do we really ever pass anything other than struct acpi_device to
ACPI_COMPANION_SET() as the second arg?
Thanks,
Rafael
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations
2017-09-19 20:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
@ 2017-09-20 8:34 ` Mika Westerberg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mika Westerberg @ 2017-09-20 8:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rafael J. Wysocki
Cc: john.hubbard, Sakari Ailus, LKML, Rob Herring, Rafael J . Wysocki,
John Hubbard
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 10:39:36PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Do we really ever pass anything other than struct acpi_device to
> ACPI_COMPANION_SET() as the second arg?
No, and we should not accept anything else than acpi_device either.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-09-20 8:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-09-16 0:35 [PATCH 0/1] acpi: unbreak ACPI_HANDLE(), encapsulate fwnode_operations john.hubbard
2017-09-16 0:35 ` [PATCH 1/1] " john.hubbard
2017-09-18 10:50 ` Sakari Ailus
2017-09-19 7:44 ` Mika Westerberg
2017-09-19 20:39 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2017-09-20 8:34 ` Mika Westerberg
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.