linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V14 5/9] dma: qcom_hidma: implement lower level hardware interface

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]

Date:	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 14:29:41 -0500
From:	Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
To:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
Cc:	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
	mark.rutland@....com, timur@...eaurora.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, cov@...eaurora.org, jcm@...hat.com,
	shankerd@...eaurora.org, vikrams@...eaurora.org,
	eric.auger@...aro.org, agross@...eaurora.org, arnd@...db.de,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V14 5/9] dma: qcom_hidma: implement lower level hardware
 interface

On 3/11/2016 11:44 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote:
> On 3/11/2016 11:32 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
>>>>> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
>>>>>>>> +	       TRE_SIZE);
>> This one
>>
>>>>>>>> +	lldev->tx_status_list[tre->idx].err_code = 0;
>>>>>>>> +	lldev->tx_status_list[tre->idx].err_info = 0;
>>>>>>>> +	tre->queued = 1;
>>>>>>>> +	lldev->pending_tre_count++;
>>>>
>>>> Is this the only one without alignment? I couldn't understand what you mean by 
>>>> above one?
>> quoting Coding Style:
>>
>> Statements longer than 80 columns will be broken into sensible chunks, unless
>> exceeding 80 columns significantly increases readability and does not hide
>> information. 
> 
>> "Descendants are always substantially shorter than the parent and
>> are placed substantially to the right."
>>
>>
> 
> Sorry for my poor English. I never got this rule. 
> 
> Which one is a "substantially" right? Can you give me an example?
> 
> I need to understand how you'd write this to satisfy the above rule.
> 
> like this:
> 
> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
>        TRE_SIZE);
> 
> or
> 
> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset,
>        &tre->tre_local[0], TRE_SIZE);
> 
> or
> 
> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
> 							   TRE_SIZE);
> 
> or
> 
> memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset,
> 	&tre->tre_local[0], 
> 	TRE_SIZE);
> 
so, I looked at other examples in drivers/dma/dw/core.c file...

I'm seeing two different patterns in the code. One pattern is to align
the next line to the first character of the first line like I did based
on the previous review comments.

	mem_width = min_t(unsigned int,
                          data_width, dwc_fast_ffs(mem | len));

The second example places an extra tab like this.

	list_add_tail(&desc->desc_node,
			&first->tx_list);


Based on this example: this is how I'm changing the second one

+       lldev->tre_write_offset = (lldev->tre_write_offset + HIDMA_TRE_SIZE)
+                                       % lldev->tre_ring_size;
+

I'm still not sure what you want to do with this:

Is this what you want to do ?
        memcpy(lldev->tre_ring + lldev->tre_write_offset, &tre->tre_local[0],
-              HIDMA_TRE_SIZE);
+               HIDMA_TRE_SIZE);

I also got flagged before that HIDMA_TRE_SIZE does not start from the first 
character.

I have done the renaming. This is all left for me to post a follow up.


-- 
Sinan Kaya
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project