linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: langwell: ensure alternate function is cleared

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20111006101935.GN3009@ponder.secretlab.ca>
Date:	Thu, 6 Oct 2011 04:19:35 -0600
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: langwell: ensure alternate function is cleared

On Thu, Oct 06, 2011 at 09:37:21AM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 05/10/11 19:58, Grant Likely wrote:
> >On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Adrian Hunter<adrian.hunter@...el.com>  wrote:
> >>On 04/10/11 21:37, Grant Likely wrote:
> >>>
> >>>On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 02:36:07PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >>>>+       ptr = (void __iomem *)(lnw->reg_base + reg_type * nreg * 4 + reg
> >>>>* 4);
> >>>
> >>>This looks wrong.  It looks to me like the __iomem annotation should
> >>>be added to ->reg_base.
> >>>
> >>>Otherwise, the patch looks okay.
> >>>
> >>
> >>Deserves a separate patch...
> >
> >What order do they get applied in?</grant-being-lazy>
> 
> First one first ;-)

Please repost the 2nd patch properly.  The way it was copied in caused
whitespace corruption and forces me to manually apply the patch.  It
adds a lot of extra work if I cannot use "git am" to apply from my
inbox.

Thanks,
g.

> 
> i.e.
> 
> gpio: langwell: ensure alternate function is cleared
> gpio: langwell: declare reg_base as __iomem
> 
> Since the absence of __iomem was present before the original
> patch, there is no advantage to having the second one first,
> but the original patch would need to be changed as well.
> 
> >
> >>
> >>From: Adrian Hunter<adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> >>Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2011 10:29:27 +0300
> >>Subject: [PATCH] gpio: langwell: declare reg_base as __iomem
> >>
> >>reg_base is __iomem so add that to the declaration
> >>and fix up assignment casts and types.
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter<adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> >>---
> >>  drivers/gpio/gpio-langwell.c |   12 ++++++------
> >>  1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-langwell.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-langwell.c
> >>index 00692e8..b7465e5 100644
> >>--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-langwell.c
> >>+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-langwell.c
> >>@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ enum GPIO_REG {
> >>
> >>  struct lnw_gpio {
> >>        struct gpio_chip                chip;
> >>-       void                            *reg_base;
> >>+       void __iomem                    *reg_base;
> >>        spinlock_t                      lock;
> >>        unsigned                        irq_base;
> >>        struct pci_dev                  *pdev;
> >>@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ static void __iomem *gpio_reg(struct gpio_chip *chip,
> >>unsigned offset,
> >>        u8 reg = offset / 32;
> >>        void __iomem *ptr;
> >>
> >>-       ptr = (void __iomem *)(lnw->reg_base + reg_type * nreg * 4 + reg *
> >>4);
> >>+       ptr = lnw->reg_base + reg_type * nreg * 4 + reg * 4;
> >>        return ptr;
> >>  }
> >>
> >>@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static void __iomem *gpio_reg_2bit(struct gpio_chip *chip,
> >>unsigned offset,
> >>        u8 reg = offset / 16;
> >>        void __iomem *ptr;
> >>
> >>-       ptr = (void __iomem *)(lnw->reg_base + reg_type * nreg * 4 + reg *
> >>4);
> >>+       ptr = lnw->reg_base + reg_type * nreg * 4 + reg * 4;
> >>        return ptr;
> >>  }
> >>
> >>@@ -299,7 +299,7 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops lnw_gpio_pm_ops = {
> >>  static int __devinit lnw_gpio_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> >>                        const struct pci_device_id *id)
> >>  {
> >>-       void *base;
> >>+       void __iomem *base;
> >>        int i;
> >>        resource_size_t start, len;
> >>        struct lnw_gpio *lnw;
> >>@@ -324,8 +324,8 @@ static int __devinit lnw_gpio_probe(struct pci_dev
> >>*pdev,
> >>                dev_err(&pdev->dev, "error mapping bar1\n");
> >>                goto err3;
> >>        }
> >>-       irq_base = *(u32 *)base;
> >>-       gpio_base = *((u32 *)base + 1);
> >>+       irq_base = *(__force u32 *)base;
> >>+       gpio_base = *((__force u32 *)base + 1);
> >>        /* release the IO mapping, since we already get the info from bar1 */
> >>        iounmap(base);
> >>        /* get the register base from bar0 */
> >>--
> >>1.7.6
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> 
--
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/