linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] i2c: iproc: Add Broadcom iProc I2C Driver

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:	Sat, 17 Jan 2015 16:30:33 -0800
From:	Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	"Pawel Moll" <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Christian Daudt <bcm@...thebug.org>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@...aro.org>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
	<linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] i2c: iproc: Add Broadcom iProc I2C Driver



On 1/17/2015 2:40 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 01:26:41PM -0800, Ray Jui wrote:
>> 	time_left = wait_for_completion_timeout(&iproc_i2c->done, time_left);
>>
>> 	/* disable all interrupts */
>> 	writel(0, iproc_i2c->base + IE_OFFSET);
>>
>> 	if (!time_left && !atomic_read(&iproc_i2c->transfer_is_successful)) {
> 
> Why are you using atomic_read() here?
> 
transfer_is_successful 1) will be reset to 0 in this function (before
kick start the I2C transfer), 2) will be set to 1 in the ISR (to signal
completion of the I2C transfer), and 3) will be checked in this function
here. I thought that means I should declare it volatile, because it can
be modified in both the process context and interrupt context (and I use
atomic because I remember Linux checkpatch warns against using volatile)?
--
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/