linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regmap: Add support for register paging

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]

Message-ID: <20120511141010.GE3960@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 May 2012 15:10:10 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	dd diasemi <dd.diasemi@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Anthony Olech <Anthony.Olech@...semi.com>, gg@...mlogic.co.uk,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regmap: Add support for register paging

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 03:55:54PM +0200, dd diasemi wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Mark Brown

> > right now the diff is pretty hard to read so I may have missed some
> > issues and I'm also reluctant to add any additional combinations of
> > build options that aren't actually needed.

> I did some rearrangement in the code, like splitting functions into
> halves, so it is hard to read it from the patch. However, I have not
> changed present functionality and if paging is not initialised, regmap
> behaves the same way as before.

Ah, if you're going to do this sort of thing the best way to do it is to
rearrange the code first as one patch then add a second patch adding the
new functionality.  That way the code motion isn't mixed up with the new
code which makes review easier.

> I will prepare patch without compilation flag, as it is not so important.

Thanks.

> > One other fun thing which just occurred to me is that I've got a bunch
> > of chips which have several independantly paged regions.  I'm not sure
> > that's really worth handling here, though.

> I have more advanced solution, which actually makes register mapping
> split into virtual address ranges. This may solve many problems,
> including giving capability to support several indirect register
> ranges at once.
> Let me know, what you think about this API?

I think that sounds roughly like what I was thinking of so it's probably
sensible but obviously it'll depend on the implementation.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)