linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/22] ASoC: Ux500: Move MSP pinctrl setup into the MSP driver

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: <20120820115914.GP8450@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 20 Aug 2012 12:59:25 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linus.walleij@...ricsson.com,
	arnd@...db.de, broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	STEricsson_nomadik_linux@...t.st.com,
	Patrice CHOTARD <patrice.chotard@...ricsson.com>,
	Ola LILJA2 <ola.o.lilja@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/22] ASoC: Ux500: Move MSP pinctrl setup into the MSP
 driver

On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 10:51:02AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > In the initial submission of the MSP driver msp1 and msp3's associated
> > pinctrl mechanism was passed back to platform code using a plat_init()
> > call-back routine, but it has no place in platform code. The MSP driver
> > should set this up for the appropriate ports. Instead we use a use_pinctrl
> > identifier which is passed from platform_data/Device Tree which indicates
> > which ports should use pinctrl.
> >
> > CC: alsa-devel@...a-project.org
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> 
> This is very good because it rids platform code and makes the driver
> self-contained without strange platform data hooks.
> 
> Now details...
> 
> > +/* MSP1/3 Tx/Rx usage protection */
> > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(msp_rxtx_lock);
> > +
> > +/* Pin modes */
> > +struct pinctrl *pinctrl_p;
> > +struct pinctrl_state *pinctrl_def;
> > +struct pinctrl_state *pinctrl_sleep;
> > +
> > +/* Reference Count */
> > +int pinctrl_rxtx_ref;
> 
> 
> But wait. These are just local statics. Surelty you can put these into
> struct ux500_msp instead? Here it looks like these will be used for
> all ports, so MSP2 will enable the pins requested by MSP1 etc
> completely broken. So put it into the struct ux500_msp state
> container from ux500_msp_i2s.h where it belongs.
> 
> Refer to drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c when in trouble. This
> one is a good pinctrl example.

How do you see the MSP1 and MSP3 usage protection working if I hide it
all away in MSP specific structs?

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/