linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi/rockchip: fix bug that case spi can't go as fast as slave request

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: <20141016093410.GB2200@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:34:10 +0200
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	addy ke <addy.ke@...k-chips.com>
Cc:	heiko@...ech.de, dianders@...omium.org, grant.likely@...aro.org,
	robh+dt@...nel.org, amstan@...gle.com, sonnyrao@...gle.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	olof@...om.net, hj@...k-chips.com, kever.yang@...k-chips.com,
	xjq@...k-chips.com, huangtao@...k-chips.com, zyw@...k-chips.com,
	yzq@...k-chips.com, zhenfu.fang@...k-chips.com, cf@...k-chips.com,
	zhangqing@...k-chips.com, hl@...k-chips.com, wei.luo@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] spi/rockchip: fix bug that case spi can't go as fast
 as slave request

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 05:16:02PM +0800, addy ke wrote:
> On 2014/10/15 21:04, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 07:25:49PM +0800, Addy Ke wrote:

> >> +	if (WARN_ON(rs->speed > MAX_SCLK_OUT))
> >> +		rs->speed = MAX_SCLK_OUT;

> >> +	/* the minimum divsor is 2 */
> >> +	if (rs->max_freq < 2 * rs->speed) {
> >> +		clk_set_rate(rs->spiclk, 2 * rs->speed);
> >> +		rs->max_freq = clk_get_rate(rs->spiclk);
> >> +	}

> > I'll apply this but you should be checking the return code from
> > clk_set_rate() here, please send a followup patch doing that.  It might

> If clk_set_rate return error, do I only put dev_warn here or return error value to spi core?

It'd be better to return an error if we need to set the rate and can't
do it.

> > also be worth consdering just setting the rate unconditionally here, it
> > seems like it should make things simpler.

> I think we need.
> If we set the rate unconditionally here, clk_set_rate() will be executed in each spi transfer.

Is that really such a high cost?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)