All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@pmeerw.net>,
	linux-iio <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: fake ACPI IDs in the drivers
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:32:43 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201125153243.00001e48@Huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75VdZ1qG1yht_Wa_Npn8jv61ux+mWBeayd5x8uLOj2JarcA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:00:54 +0200
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 1:47 PM Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de> wrote:
> > On 11/25/20 12:14 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:  
> 
> > > Recent discussion [1] [2] around faking ACPI ID in RTC subsystem and a
> > > sudden check [3] (due to last Hans' patches related to ACPI based
> > > systems) of IIO makes me wonder if we may start cleaning drivers from
> > > faked ACPI IDs and establish a stricter rules for the ID table
> > > entries.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?  
> >
> > The cat is probably out of the bag.
> >
> > If there are systems shipping with those unregistered ACPI IDs we still
> > have to support them.  
> 
> Yes, but we can do our best to google for them and try other sources
> (like contacts with vendor companies who can acknowledge if there were
> an ID issued or not).
> 
> > I'd assume that most drivers that have a acpi_device_id table do have
> > hardware that uses that ID and were not just cargo culted.

I fear that is overly optimistic :(

Every time the ID is non obvious we are pretty safe it has come from real
hardware (whether registered or not) but we have a bunch were introduced
by various fairly new contributors that I let in before I knew better :(
Those tend to just be part numbers squished into ACPI ID format.

> >
> > For new drivers we should push back on unregistered IDs, but if there is
> > hardware that uses them we have to take the patches.  
> 
> Right. But at the same time we have to push the idea of proper IDs to
> the vendor companies, so they won't abuse ACPI specification anymore.
> 

Absolutely.  Sometimes it is just a case of moaning and asking whether
hardware is already shipping with the ID - if not push back hard so they
ideally go persuade their management to put a proper process in place.

So upshot, in my view, is to be very careful removing existing IDs
but definitely be very resistive to introducing any new ones without
confirmation they are on some companies official registers.

Jonathan



      parent reply	other threads:[~2020-11-25 15:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-25 11:14 fake ACPI IDs in the drivers Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-25 11:47 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2020-11-25 12:00   ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-25 12:05     ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2020-11-25 12:22       ` Alexandru Ardelean
2020-11-25 12:45       ` Andy Shevchenko
2020-11-25 15:32     ` Jonathan Cameron [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20201125153243.00001e48@Huawei.com \
    --to=jonathan.cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pmeerw@pmeerw.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.