[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4E02BD72.8040007@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 21:13:38 -0700
From: Dirk Brandewie <dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] spi-dw: Force error on out of range chip select.
On 06/22/2011 08:51 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 8:00 PM,<dirk.brandewie@...il.com> wrote:
>> From: Dirk Brandewie<dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
>>
>> BUG_ON() if the selected chip select is out of range.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dirk Brandewie<dirk.brandewie@...il.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/spi/spi-dw.h | 3 +--
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
>> index 860bc34..3fa4c13 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-dw.h
>> @@ -178,8 +178,7 @@ static inline void spi_dw_set_clk(struct spi_dw *dws, u16 div)
>>
>> static inline void spi_dw_chip_sel(struct spi_dw *dws, u16 cs)
>> {
>> - if (cs> dws->num_cs)
>> - return;
>> + BUG_ON(cs>= dws->master->num_chipselect);
>
> BUG is rather an over-reaction. The transfer should be rejected if
> the cs# is invalid, and a warning message is appropriate, but BUG() is
> too extreme.
This is extreme I agree, the current driver will fail silently if an out of
range chip select is requested.
We can drop this one for now and I will put a proper check in probe/init so we
won't get here.
>
> g.
--
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