linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: host: ehci-exynos: Remove unnecessary usb-phy support

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.4.44L0.1409171051520.1579-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date:	Wed, 17 Sep 2014 10:57:57 -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>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<kgene.kim@...sung.com>, <jg1.han@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] usb: host: ehci-exynos: Remove unnecessary usb-phy
 support

On Wed, 17 Sep 2014, Vivek Gautam wrote:

> Now that we have completely moved from older USB-PHY drivers
> to newer GENERIC-PHY drivers for PHYs available with USB controllers
> on Exynos series of SoCs, we can remove the support for the same
> in our host drivers too.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>

I don't see why you made your changes in this awkward way.  For 
instance...

> @@ -59,49 +54,39 @@ static int exynos_ehci_get_phy(struct device *dev,
>  {
>  	struct device_node *child;
>  	struct phy *phy;
> -	int phy_number;
> -	int ret = 0;
> +	int phy_num;

Why rename this variable?  Wasn't the original name good enough?

> +	int ret;
>  
>  	for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
> -		ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &phy_number);
> +		ret = of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &phy_num);
>  		if (ret) {
>  			dev_err(dev, "Failed to parse device tree\n");
>  			of_node_put(child);
>  			return ret;
>  		}
>  
> -		if (phy_number >= PHY_NUMBER) {
> +		if (phy_num >= PHY_NUMBER) {
>  			dev_err(dev, "Invalid number of PHYs\n");
>  			of_node_put(child);
>  			return -EINVAL;
>  		}
>  
> -		phy = devm_of_phy_get(dev, child, NULL);
> +		exynos_ehci->phy[phy_num] = devm_of_phy_get(dev, child, NULL);
> +		phy = exynos_ehci->phy[phy_num];

Why make two changes, resulting in more code, when you could have made 
just one change?

		phy = devm_of_phy_get(dev, child, NULL);
+		exynos_ehci->phy[phy_num] = phy;

Also, the patch description should mention that you are adding support 
for EPROBE_DEFER.

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/