linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: Add PMIC wrapper for MT8135 and MT8173 SoCs

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: <20150310161049.GI24885@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Tue, 10 Mar 2015 17:10:49 +0100
From:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	YH Chen <yh.chen@...iatek.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Henry Chen <henryc.chen@...iatek.com>,
	Flora Fu <flora.fu@...iatek.com>,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
	Yingjoe Chen <Yingjoe.Chen@...iatek.com>,
	Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@...iatek.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] soc: mediatek: Add PMIC wrapper for MT8135 and
 MT8173 SoCs

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:46:11PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:22:34PM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > +	for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
> > +		pwrap_writel(wrp, i, PWRAP_SIDLY);
> > +		pwrap_read(wrp, PWRAP_DEW_READ_TEST, &rdata);
> > +		printk("%s: 0x%04x\n", __func__, rdata);
> 
> Is this really ready for submission, or is this just a hidden oversight?
> 
> What I tend to do with such debugging is _not_ to indent it at all, which
> means when the file is reviewed before sending it out (or indeed, when
> diffing it to review the updates before committing those changes or an
> amendment to the previous commit) that it sticks out like a sore thumb.

I often do this aswell, apparently not all the time :-/

This message is also not seen often during booting since the driver has
this in it:

	/*
	 * The PMIC could already be initialized by the bootloader.
	 * Skip initialization here in this case.
	 */
	if (!pwrap_readl(wrp, PWRAP_INIT_DONE2)) {
		ret = pwrap_init(wrp);
		if (ret) {
			dev_dbg(wrp->dev, "init failed with %d\n", ret);
			goto err_out2;
		}
	}

I first have to comment out the already initialized check to see this
message. I just rechecked, yes, the initialisation still works as
expected.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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/