| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20121218163009.fb21fec8.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 16:30:09 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>
Cc: rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@...sung.com>,
Chiwoong Byun <woong.byun@...sung.com>,
Myugnjoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] [RESEND PATCH] RTC: MAX77686: Add Maxim 77686
driver
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 15:50:57 +0900
Jonghwa Lee <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com> wrote:
> Add driver for support max77686 rtc.
> MAX77686 rtc support smpl and wtsr mode. It has two alarm register
> which can be used for alarming to wake system up. This drvier uses regmap
> to access its register.
>
> ...
>
> +static inline int max77686_rtc_calculate_wday(u8 shifted)
> +{
> + int counter = -1;
> + while (shifted) {
> + shifted >>= 1;
> + counter++;
> + }
> + return counter;
> +}
We should be able to use log2() in here?
>
> ...
>
> +static inline int max77686_rtc_update(struct max77686_rtc_info *info,
> + enum MAX77686_RTC_OP op)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + unsigned int data;
> +
> + switch (op) {
> + case MAX77686_RTC_WRITE:
> + data = 1 << RTC_UDR_SHIFT;
> + break;
> + case MAX77686_RTC_READ:
> + data = 1 << RTC_RBUDR_SHIFT;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + ret = regmap_update_bits(info->max77686->rtc_regmap,
> + MAX77686_RTC_UPDATE0, data, data);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + dev_err(info->dev, "%s: fail to write update reg(ret=%d, data=0x%x)\n",
> + __func__, ret, data);
> + else {
> + /* Minimum 16ms delay required before RTC update. */
> + msleep(MAX77686_RTC_UPDATE_DELAY);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> +}
This function has about ten callers. No way in the world do we want it
to be inlined! Probably the compiler will just ignore your `inline',
but we should remove it to be sure.
>
> ...
>
> +static const struct rtc_class_ops max77686_rtc_ops = {
> + .read_time = max77686_rtc_read_time,
> + .set_time = max77686_rtc_set_time,
> + .read_alarm = max77686_rtc_read_alarm,
> + .set_alarm = max77686_rtc_set_alarm,
> + .alarm_irq_enable = max77686_rtc_alarm_irq_enable,
> +};
> +
> +#ifdef MAX77686_RTC_WTSR_SMPL
hm, this is always undefined. Why is this code here?
> +static void max77686_rtc_enable_wtsr(struct max77686_rtc_info *info, bool enable)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + unsigned int val, mask;
> +
> + if (enable)
> + val = (1 << WTSR_EN_SHIFT) | (3 << WTSRT_SHIFT);
> + else
> + val = 0;
> +
> + mask = WTSR_EN_MASK | WTSRT_MASK;
> +
> + dev_info(info->dev, "%s: %s WTSR\n", __func__,
> + enable ? "enable" : "disable");
> +
> + ret = regmap_update_bits(info->max77686->rtc_regmap,
> + MAX77686_WTSR_SMPL_CNTL, mask, val);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(info->dev, "%s: fail to update WTSR reg(%d)\n",
> + __func__, ret);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + max77686_rtc_update(info, MAX77686_RTC_WRITE);
> +}
> +
> +static void max77686_rtc_enable_smpl(struct max77686_rtc_info *info, bool enable)
> +{
> + int ret;
> + unsigned int val, mask;
> +
> + if (enable)
> + val = (1 << SMPL_EN_SHIFT) | (0 << SMPLT_SHIFT);
> + else
> + val = 0;
> +
> + mask = SMPL_EN_MASK | SMPLT_MASK;
> +
> + dev_info(info->dev, "%s: %s SMPL\n", __func__,
> + enable ? "enable" : "disable");
> +
> + ret = regmap_update_bits(info->max77686->rtc_regmap,
> + MAX77686_WTSR_SMPL_CNTL, mask, val);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(info->dev, "%s: fail to update SMPL reg(%d)\n",
> + __func__, ret);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + max77686_rtc_update(info, MAX77686_RTC_WRITE);
> +
> + val = 0;
> + regmap_read(info->max77686->rtc_regmap, MAX77686_WTSR_SMPL_CNTL, &val);
> + pr_info("%s: WTSR_SMPL(0x%02x)\n", __func__, val);
> +}
> +#endif /* MAX77686_RTC_WTSR_SMPL */
>
> ...
>
> +static int __devinit max77686_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
CONFIG_HOTPLUG is removed, so we should stop using devinit, devexit,
devinit_p, etc.
>
> ...
>
--- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c~rtc-max77686-add-maxim-77686-driver-fix
+++ a/drivers/rtc/rtc-max77686.c
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static int max77686_rtc_tm_to_data(struc
return 0;
}
-static inline int max77686_rtc_update(struct max77686_rtc_info *info,
+static int max77686_rtc_update(struct max77686_rtc_info *info,
enum MAX77686_RTC_OP op)
{
int ret;
@@ -501,7 +501,7 @@ static struct regmap_config max77686_rtc
.val_bits = 8,
};
-static int __devinit max77686_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int max77686_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct max77686_dev *max77686 = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
struct max77686_rtc_info *info;
@@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ out:
return ret;
}
-static int __devexit max77686_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+static int max77686_rtc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct max77686_rtc_info *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
@@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static struct platform_driver max77686_r
.owner = THIS_MODULE,
},
.probe = max77686_rtc_probe,
- .remove = __devexit_p(max77686_rtc_remove),
+ .remove = max77686_rtc_remove,
.shutdown = max77686_rtc_shutdown,
.id_table = rtc_id,
};
_
--
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