linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] phy: qcom: Add driver for QCOM APQ8064 SATA PHY

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: <53BFE8F9.7050700@linaro.org>
Date:	Fri, 11 Jul 2014 14:39:05 +0100
From:	Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
To:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>
CC:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] phy: qcom: Add driver for QCOM APQ8064 SATA PHY

Thankyou for the comments,

On 11/07/14 13:38, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday, July 09, 2014 12:04:06 PM Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> Add a PHY driver for uses with AHCI based SATA controller driver on the
>> APQ8064 family of SoCs.
>>
>> This patch is a forward port from Qualcomm's v3.4 andriod kernel.
>
> Android?
yep.
>
> unused define, please remove it
>
Will fix these instances in next version.
>> +
>> +#define UNIPHY_PLL_LOCK		BIT(0)
>> +#define SATA_PHY_TX_CAL		BIT(0)
>> +#define SATA_PHY_RX_CAL		BIT(0)
>> +
>> +/* default timeout set to 1 sec */
>> +#define TIMEOUT_MS		10000
>> +
>> +struct qcom_apq8064_sata_phy {
>> +	void __iomem *mmio;
>> +	struct clk *cfg_clk;
>> +	struct device *dev;
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* Helper function to do poll and timeout */
>> +static int read_poll_timeout(void __iomem *addr, u32 mask)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned long timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(TIMEOUT_MS);
>> +	u32 val;
>> +
>> +	do {
>> +		cpu_relax();
>> +		val = readl_relaxed(addr);
>> +		if (val & mask)
>> +			break;
>> +	} while (!time_after(jiffies, timeout));
>
> It would be better to use usleep_[range]() (or even msleep() if needed)
> instead of just using cpu_relax().

We really want to poll the register here, usleep/msleep would be useful 
if we know already know how much delay is required, but in this case the 
its not true.

>> +
>> +static int qcom_apq8064_sata_phy_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct qcom_apq8064_sata_phy *phy = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>
> Doesn't this require to use platform_set_drvdata() first in the ->probe
> method?
Good spot, I will fix this in next version.

Thanks,
srini
--
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/