linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] usb: Reuse fsl driver code for synopsys usb controller

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]

Date:	Sun, 20 Apr 2014 13:56:15 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Punnaiah Choudary Kalluri <punnaiah.choudary.kalluri@...inx.com>
cc:	leoli@...escale.com, <balbi@...com>, <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>, <kalluripunnaiahchoudary@...il.com>,
	<kpc528@...il.com>, Punnaiah Choudary Kalluri <punnaia@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] usb: Reuse fsl driver code for synopsys usb
 controller

On Sun, 20 Apr 2014, Punnaiah Choudary Kalluri wrote:

> Zynq soc contains a dual role usb controller and this IP is from synopsys. We
> observed that there is driver available for this controller from freescale and
> decided to reuse this driver for zynq use.
> 
> Here is the link for zynq soc TRM. Please refer chapter 15 for usb controller
> related information.
> http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/user_guides/ug585-Zynq-7000-TRM.pdf
> 
> The following series of patches add initial support for zynq soc in fsl gadget controller
> driver and fsl host controller driver.
> 
> Based on these patches, I have the following concerns and sugesstions
> 
> Since the freescale usb driver is for synopsys IP, Please consider rebranding
> this driver name and config options to reflect that it is a sysnopsys IP. So
> that other vendors who using this IP can reuse thie driver.
> 
> Also the ehci-fsl.c is for powerpc based soc's, and zynq is ARM based, i have
> protected the code which is specifc to freescale with CONFIG_FSL_SOC. Please
> suggest if there is a better way of doing this?

Filling the code with #ifdef lines is definitely not a good way to go.  
Ordinary "if" statements would be a lot better, if you can't figure out 
a reasonable way to encapsulate the differences.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/