linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] usb: ohci-exynos: Add facility to use phy provided by the generic phy framework

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: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1404251031260.1140-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date:	Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:36:48 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To:	Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>
cc:	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <balbi@...com>,
	<kgene.kim@...sung.com>, <k.debski@...sung.com>,
	<jg1.han@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] usb: ohci-exynos: Add facility to use phy provided
 by the generic phy framework

On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Vivek Gautam wrote:

> Add support to consume phy provided by Generic phy framework.
> Keeping the support for older usb-phy intact right now, in order
> to prevent any functionality break in absence of relevant
> device tree side change for ohci-exynos.
> Once we move to new phy in the device nodes for ohci, we can
> remove the support for older phys.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>
> Cc: Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>
> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>


> +static int exynos_ohci_phyg_on(struct phy *phy[])
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; ret == 0 && i < PHY_NUMBER; i++)
> +		if (phy[i])
> +			ret = phy_power_on(phy[i]);
> +	if (ret)
> +		for (i--; i >= 0; i--)
> +			if (phy[i])
> +				phy_power_off(phy[i]);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
> +static int exynos_ohci_phyg_off(struct phy *phy[])
> +{
> +	int i;
> +	int ret = 0;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; ret == 0 && i < PHY_NUMBER; i++)
> +		if (phy[i])
> +			ret = phy_power_off(phy[i]);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}

You probably shouldn't break out of this loop if ret is nonzero; you
should continue to power off the remaining phys.

I'd be inclined to put these two routines directly into 
exynos_ohci_phy_enable() and exynos_ohci_phy_disable(), since they 
aren't used anywhere else.

> @@ -151,6 +253,7 @@ skip_phy:
>  
>  fail_add_hcd:
>  	exynos_ohci_phy_disable(pdev);
> +	exynos_ohci_phyg_off(exynos_ohci->phy_g);

Why did you add this line?  It doesn't do anything useful, because 
exynos_ohci_phy_disable() already calls exynos_ohci_phyg_off().

Alan Stern

--
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/