linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 03/10] mfd: cros_ec: Allow static din/dout buffers with cros_ec

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: <20140618075316.GI21030@lee--X1>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:53:16 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:	Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>, swarren@...dotorg.org,
	olof@...om.net, Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
	Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>, sjg@...omium.org,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, broonie@...nel.org,
	sameo@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] mfd: cros_ec: Allow static din/dout buffers with
 cros_ec_register()

On Mon, 16 Jun 2014, Doug Anderson wrote:

> From: Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>
> 
> The lower-level driver may want to provide its own buffers. If so,
> there's no need to allocate new ones.  This already happens to work
> just fine (since we check for size of 0 and use devm allocation), but
> it's good to document it.
> 
> [dianders: Resolved conflicts; documented that no code changes needed
> on mainline]
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>
> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
> ---
>  include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> index 7e9fe6e..2ee3190 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/cros_ec.h
> @@ -68,8 +68,8 @@ struct cros_ec_msg {
>   * We use this alignment to keep ARM and x86 happy. Probably word
>   * alignment would be OK, there might be a small performance advantage
>   * to using dword.
> - * @din_size: size of din buffer
> - * @dout_size: size of dout buffer
> + * @din_size: size of din buffer to allocate (zero to use static din)
> + * @dout_size: size of dout buffer to allocate (zero to use static dout)

Why don't these use your new format i.e. doutsize, etc?

>   * @command_send: send a command
>   * @command_recv: receive a command
>   * @ec_name: name of EC device (e.g. 'chromeos-ec')

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics 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/