linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c

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: <D5ECB3C7A6F99444980976A8C6D896384FA5EC4B37@EAPEX1MAIL1.st.com>
Date:	Tue, 5 Jun 2012 11:42:50 +0800
From:	Bhupesh SHARMA <bhupesh.sharma@...com>
To:	Federico Vaga <federico.vaga@...il.com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
	Giancarlo ASNAGHI <giancarlo.asnaghi@...com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Alessandro Rubini <rubini@...dd.com>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c_can on PCI

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-can-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:linux-can-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Federico Vaga
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 10:16 PM
> To: Alan Cox
> Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger; Marc Kleine-Budde; Giancarlo ASNAGHI; Alan
> Cox; Alessandro Rubini; linux-can@...r.kernel.org;
> netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] c_can_pci: generic module for c_can on PCI
> 
> > > +static u16 c_can_pci_read_reg_aligned_to_16bit(struct c_can_priv
> > > *priv, +						void *reg)
> >
> > I'm a bit worried this function name might be too short ;)
> 
> I know :) I was inspired by the same function in c_can_platform.c

There was a purpose to keeping these long function names when I wrote
the c_can_platform driver initially. These were kept to support the 
SoCs (even the flaky ones) which I could trace at that time and used C_CAN controllers
(e.g. Hynix, ST's SPEAr eMPUs, etc..) and had different register bank layouts.

In some of these SoC's the C_CAN registers which are essentially 16-bit or 32-bit
registers are aligned always to a 32-bit boundary (i.e. even a 16-bit register
is aligned to 32-bit boundary).

So, I had to implement two variants of the read/write reg routines. I am not sure your SoC implementation needs them.
If it does, I will categorize it as flaky as well :)
 
> About these function I suggest to move them into c_can.c because they
> are the same for c_can_platform.c and c_can_pci.c Then add a new field
> c_can_priv->offset which can be used to shift the register offset
> coherently with the memory alignment. Finally, remove c_can_priv-
> >read_reg and c_can_priv->write_reg and use internal c_can.c function
> to
> read and write registers.

See above. There was a reason for keeping these routines in c_can_platform.c
Simply put, every platform having a Bosch C_CAN module can have it's own implementation
of the bus (for example you use PCI) and register bank layout (16-bit or 32-bit aligned).

I would suggest to keep the same arrangement.

> static u16 c_can_read_reg(struct c_can_priv *priv, enum reg index)
> {
> 	return readw(priv->base + (priv->regs[index] << priv->offset));
> }
> static void c_can_write_reg(struct c_can_priv *priv, enum reg index,
> 						u16 val)
> {
> 	writew(val, priv->base + (priv->regs[index] << priv->offset));
> }
> 
> 
> If it's ok, I can made a patch for this in the next days.
> 

[snip..]


Regards,
Bhupesh
--
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/