| 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: <CAPdLdqmA5HkRe9xLOUybOQQzpkmqX8Ot4aH9ZA7B_s3Zp90tPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:50:03 -0700
From: Markus Mayer <markus.mayer@...aro.org>
To: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
Dave Gerlach <d-gerlach@...com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
Device Tree List <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
ARM Kernel List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2/5] mailbox/omap: add support for parsing dt devices
If I may nit-pick here for a minute...
On 11 July 2014 15:04, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com> wrote:
> Logic has been added to the OMAP2+ mailbox code to parse the
> mailbox dt nodes and construct the different sub-mailboxes
> associated with the instance. The DT representation of the
> sub-mailbox devices is different from legacy platform data
> representation to allow flexibility of interrupt configuration
> between Tx and Rx fifos (to also possibly allow simplex devices
> in the future). The DT representation gathers similar information
> that was being passed previously through the platform data, except
> for the number of fifos, interrupts and interrupt type information,
> which are gathered through driver compatible match data.
>
> The non-DT support has to be maintained for now to not break
> OMAP3 legacy boot, and the legacy-style code will be cleaned
> up once OMAP3 is also converted to DT-boot only.
>
> Cc: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
> ---
> drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c | 156 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 132 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c b/drivers/mailbox/omap-mailbox.c
[...]
> static int omap_mbox_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct resource *mem;
> int ret;
> struct omap_mbox **list, *mbox, *mboxblk;
> struct omap_mbox_pdata *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> - struct omap_mbox_dev_info *info;
> + struct omap_mbox_dev_info *info = NULL;
> + struct omap_mbox_fifo_info *finfo, *finfoblk;
> struct omap_mbox_device *mdev;
> struct omap_mbox_fifo *fifo;
> - u32 intr_type;
> + struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> + struct device_node *child;
> + const struct of_device_id *match;
> + u32 intr_type, info_count;
> + u32 num_users, num_fifos;
> + u32 tmp[3];
> u32 l;
> int i;
>
> - if (!pdata || !pdata->info_cnt || !pdata->info) {
> + if (!node && (!pdata || !pdata->info_cnt || !pdata->info)) {
> pr_err("%s: platform not supported\n", __func__);
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> + if (node) {
I noticed here you are using
if (node)
/* DT stuff goes here */
else
/* non-DT stuff goes here */
but below the logic is reversed.
> + match = of_match_device(omap_mailbox_of_match, &pdev->dev);
> + if (!match)
> + return -ENODEV;
> + intr_type = (u32)match->data;
> +
> + if (of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,mbox-num-users",
> + &num_users))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + if (of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,mbox-num-fifos",
> + &num_fifos))
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + info_count = of_get_available_child_count(node);
> + if (!info_count) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no available mbox devices found\n");
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + } else { /* non-DT device creation */
> + info_count = pdata->info_cnt;
> + info = pdata->info;
> + intr_type = pdata->intr_type;
> + num_users = pdata->num_users;
> + num_fifos = pdata->num_fifos;
> + }
> +
> + finfoblk = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, info_count * sizeof(*finfoblk),
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!finfoblk)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + finfo = finfoblk;
> + child = NULL;
> + for (i = 0; i < info_count; i++, finfo++) {
> + if (!node) {
Here it's
if (!node)
/* non-DT stuff */
else
/* DT stuff */
I think the "if (node) ..." version is a bit cleaner. Besides it's
nice if code is consistent. Do you mind changing the if statement here
so it matches the logic used above?
> + finfo->tx_id = info->tx_id;
> + finfo->rx_id = info->rx_id;
> + finfo->tx_usr = info->usr_id;
> + finfo->tx_irq = info->irq_id;
> + finfo->rx_usr = info->usr_id;
> + finfo->rx_irq = info->irq_id;
> + finfo->name = info->name;
> + info++;
> + } else {
> + child = of_get_next_available_child(node, child);
> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(child, "ti,mbox-tx",
> + tmp, ARRAY_SIZE(tmp));
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + finfo->tx_id = tmp[0];
> + finfo->tx_irq = tmp[1];
> + finfo->tx_usr = tmp[2];
> +
> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(child, "ti,mbox-rx",
> + tmp, ARRAY_SIZE(tmp));
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + finfo->rx_id = tmp[0];
> + finfo->rx_irq = tmp[1];
> + finfo->rx_usr = tmp[2];
> +
> + finfo->name = child->name;
> + }
> + if (finfo->tx_id >= num_fifos || finfo->rx_id >= num_fifos ||
> + finfo->tx_usr >= num_users || finfo->rx_usr >= num_users)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
--
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