| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <19F8576C6E063C45BE387C64729E7394044F124F7B@dbde02.ent.ti.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:05:48 +0530
From: "Savoy, Pavan" <pavan_savoy@...com>
To: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
CC: "gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
"alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
"Jain, Naveen" <naveen_jain@...com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] drivers:staging:ti-st: remove st_get_plat_device
Randy,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Randy Dunlap [mailto:randy.dunlap@...cle.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 12:32 PM
> To: Savoy, Pavan
> Cc: gregkh@...e.de; alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> devel@...verdev.osuosl.org; Jain, Naveen
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers:staging:ti-st: remove st_get_plat_device
>
> On 08/19/10 11:08, pavan_savoy@...com wrote:
> > From: Pavan Savoy <pavan_savoy@...com>
> >
> > In order to support multiple ST platform devices, a new symbol
> > 'st_get_plat_device' earlier needed to be exported by the arch/XX/brd-XX.c
> > file which intends to add the ST platform device.
> >
> > On removing this dependency, now inside ST driver maintain the array of
> > ST platform devices that would be registered.
> > As of now let id=0, as and when we end up having such platforms
> > where mutliple ST devices can exist, id would come from
> > protocol drivers (BT, FM and GPS) as to on which platform device
> > they want to register to.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Pavan Savoy <pavan_savoy@...com>
>
> Thanks, that builds cleanly. I'm OK with it if you are comfortable with a
> hard limit on the fixed number of devices that can be supported:
Yep, Thanks for pointing out, sort of cleaned up the code.
> +#define MAX_ST_DEVICES 3 /* Imagine 1 on each UART for now */
> +struct platform_device *st_kim_devices[MAX_ST_DEVICES];
>
> We usually try not to have such limits nor use arrays like that,
> but if the nature of the device and its platform/environment is like
> that, so be it.
>
Actually on all platforms that I have seen there's only 1 such device.
The device is basically a connectivity chip (with Bluetooth, FM and GPS working
on a single UART)
The number which I mentioned was out of imagination.
I don't think we are ever going to have multiple of them either...
> > ---
> > drivers/staging/ti-st/st.h | 1 -
> > drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.c | 9 ++++-----
> > drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.h | 2 +-
> > drivers/staging/ti-st/st_kim.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
> > 4 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st.h b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st.h
> > index 9952579..1b3060e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st.h
> > @@ -80,5 +80,4 @@ struct st_proto_s {
> > extern long st_register(struct st_proto_s *);
> > extern long st_unregister(enum proto_type);
> >
> > -extern struct platform_device *st_get_plat_device(void);
> > #endif /* ST_H */
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.c b/drivers/staging/ti-
> st/st_core.c
> > index 063c9b1..b85d8bf 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.c
> > @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
> > #include "st_ll.h"
> > #include "st.h"
> >
> > -#define VERBOSE
> > /* strings to be used for rfkill entries and by
> > * ST Core to be used for sysfs debug entry
> > */
> > @@ -581,7 +580,7 @@ long st_register(struct st_proto_s *new_proto)
> > long err = 0;
> > unsigned long flags = 0;
> >
> > - st_kim_ref(&st_gdata);
> > + st_kim_ref(&st_gdata, 0);
> > pr_info("%s(%d) ", __func__, new_proto->type);
> > if (st_gdata == NULL || new_proto == NULL || new_proto->recv == NULL
> > || new_proto->reg_complete_cb == NULL) {
> > @@ -713,7 +712,7 @@ long st_unregister(enum proto_type type)
> >
> > pr_debug("%s: %d ", __func__, type);
> >
> > - st_kim_ref(&st_gdata);
> > + st_kim_ref(&st_gdata, 0);
> > if (type < ST_BT || type >= ST_MAX) {
> > pr_err(" protocol %d not supported", type);
> > return -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
> > @@ -767,7 +766,7 @@ long st_write(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > #endif
> > long len;
> >
> > - st_kim_ref(&st_gdata);
> > + st_kim_ref(&st_gdata, 0);
> > if (unlikely(skb == NULL || st_gdata == NULL
> > || st_gdata->tty == NULL)) {
> > pr_err("data/tty unavailable to perform write");
> > @@ -818,7 +817,7 @@ static int st_tty_open(struct tty_struct *tty)
> > struct st_data_s *st_gdata;
> > pr_info("%s ", __func__);
> >
> > - st_kim_ref(&st_gdata);
> > + st_kim_ref(&st_gdata, 0);
> > st_gdata->tty = tty;
> > tty->disc_data = st_gdata;
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.h b/drivers/staging/ti-
> st/st_core.h
> > index e0c32d1..8601320 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.h
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_core.h
> > @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ int st_core_init(struct st_data_s **);
> > void st_core_exit(struct st_data_s *);
> >
> > /* ask for reference from KIM */
> > -void st_kim_ref(struct st_data_s **);
> > +void st_kim_ref(struct st_data_s **, int);
> >
> > #define GPS_STUB_TEST
> > #ifdef GPS_STUB_TEST
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_kim.c b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_kim.c
> > index b4a6c7f..9e99463 100644
> > --- a/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_kim.c
> > +++ b/drivers/staging/ti-st/st_kim.c
> > @@ -72,11 +72,26 @@ const unsigned char *protocol_names[] = {
> > PROTO_ENTRY(ST_GPS, "GPS"),
> > };
> >
> > +#define MAX_ST_DEVICES 3 /* Imagine 1 on each UART for now */
> > +struct platform_device *st_kim_devices[MAX_ST_DEVICES];
> >
> > /**********************************************************************/
> > /* internal functions */
> >
> > /**
> > + * st_get_plat_device -
> > + * function which returns the reference to the platform device
> > + * requested by id. As of now only 1 such device exists (id=0)
> > + * the context requesting for reference can get the id to be
> > + * requested by a. The protocol driver which is registering or
> > + * b. the tty device which is opened.
> > + */
> > +static struct platform_device *st_get_plat_device(int id)
> > +{
> > + return st_kim_devices[id];
> > +}
> > +
> > +/**
> > * validate_firmware_response -
> > * function to return whether the firmware response was proper
> > * in case of error don't complete so that waiting for proper
> > @@ -353,7 +368,7 @@ void st_kim_chip_toggle(enum proto_type type, enum
> kim_gpio_state state)
> > struct kim_data_s *kim_gdata;
> > pr_info(" %s ", __func__);
> >
> > - kim_pdev = st_get_plat_device();
> > + kim_pdev = st_get_plat_device(0);
> > kim_gdata = dev_get_drvdata(&kim_pdev->dev);
> >
> > if (kim_gdata->gpios[type] == -1) {
> > @@ -574,12 +589,12 @@ static int kim_toggle_radio(void *data, bool blocked)
> > * This would enable multiple such platform devices to exist
> > * on a given platform
> > */
> > -void st_kim_ref(struct st_data_s **core_data)
> > +void st_kim_ref(struct st_data_s **core_data, int id)
> > {
> > struct platform_device *pdev;
> > struct kim_data_s *kim_gdata;
> > /* get kim_gdata reference from platform device */
> > - pdev = st_get_plat_device();
> > + pdev = st_get_plat_device(id);
> > kim_gdata = dev_get_drvdata(&pdev->dev);
> > *core_data = kim_gdata->core_data;
> > }
> > @@ -623,6 +638,7 @@ static int kim_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > long *gpios = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> > struct kim_data_s *kim_gdata;
> >
> > + st_kim_devices[pdev->id] = pdev;
> > kim_gdata = kzalloc(sizeof(struct kim_data_s), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > if (!kim_gdata) {
> > pr_err("no mem to allocate");
>
>
> --
> ~Randy
> *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code ***
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists