linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] mfd: mediatek: add MT6323 support to MT6397 driver

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: <1453777643.26374.11.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 11:07:23 +0800
From:	Henry Chen <henryc.chen@...iatek.com>
To:	John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>
CC:	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	Steven Liu <steven.liu@...iatek.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Flora Fu <flora.fu@...iatek.com>,
	<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/4] mfd: mediatek: add MT6323 support to MT6397
 driver

On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 19:59 +0100, John Crispin wrote:
> 
> On 25/01/2016 19:44, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> > On Monday 25 Jan 2016 16:36:40 John Crispin wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On 25/01/2016 13:41, Lee Jones wrote:
> >>> Please honour the subject format of the subsystem you are contributing
> >>> to.
> >>>
> >>> `git log --oneline -- $subsystem` gives you this.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 25 Jan 2016, John Crispin wrote:
> >>>> Signed-off-by: John Crispin <blogic@...nwrt.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >>>> @@ -261,6 +271,15 @@ static int mt6397_probe(struct platform_device
> >>>> *pdev)
> >>>>
> >>>>  	}
> >>>>  	
> >>>>  	switch (id & 0xff) {
> >>>>
> >>>> +	case MT6323_CID_CODE:
> >>>> +		mt6397->int_con[0] = MT6323_INT_CON0;
> >>>
> >>> This is confusing.  You're still using memory allocated for a mt6397
> >>> device.
> >>
> >> the variable is currently defined as struct mt6397_chip *mt6397;
> >> shall i only change the name or also create a patch to rename the struct ?
> >>
> > 
> > I think we should rename the struct and the file as well.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Matthias
> 
> Hi,
> 
> that would have been my next question. renaming the struct would imply
> renaming the driver and the whole namespace contained within. We would
> then also need to change the Kconfig and Makefile. I am happy to do this
> but want to be sure that is is actually wanted.
> 
> 	John
Hi,

Since mt6323 was similar with mt6397, I think we can reuse the
mt6397_chip without duplicate code.

Maybe we can rename the local variable name to avoid confusing.

struct mt6397_chip *mt_pmic;
...
...
switch (id & 0xff) {
	case MT6323_CID_CODE:
		mt_pmic->int_con[0] = MT6323_INT_CON0;
		mt_pmic->int_con[1] = MT6323_INT_CON1;
...
...

Henry