linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between dc

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: <32bde516-87b5-bb63-c6a3-1ec043758904@lapa.com.au>
Date:	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:28:50 +1000
From:	Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	dbaryshkov@...il.com, sre@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
	robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/7] max8903: cleans up confusing relationship between
 dc_valid, dok and dcm.

On 17/06/2016 4:26 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 06/17/2016 07:00 AM, Chris Lapa wrote:
>> From: Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>
>>
>> The max8903_charger.h file indicated that dcm and dok were not optional
>> when dc_valid is set.
>>
>> It makes sense to have dok as a compulsory pin when dc_valid is given.
>> However dcm can be optionally wired to a fixed level especially when the
>> circuit is configured for dc power exclusively.
>>
>> The previous implementation already allowed for this somewhat, however no
>> error was given if dok wasn't given whilst dc_valid was.
>>
>> The new implementation enforces dok presence when dc_valid is given. Whilst
>> allowing dcm to be optional.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Lapa <chris@...a.com.au>
>> ---
>>  drivers/power/max8903_charger.c       | 23 ++++++++++-------------
>>  include/linux/power/max8903_charger.h |  6 +++---
>>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c b/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
>> index 0a5b0e1..dbd911c4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
>> +++ b/drivers/power/max8903_charger.c
>> @@ -211,27 +211,24 @@ static int max8903_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	}
>>
>>  	if (pdata->dc_valid) {
>> -		if (pdata->dok && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dok) &&
>> -				pdata->dcm && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dcm)) {
>> +		if (pdata->dok && gpio_is_valid(pdata->dok)) {
>>  			gpio = pdata->dok; /* PULL_UPed Interrupt */
>>  			ta_in = gpio_get_value(gpio) ? 0 : 1;
>> +		} else {
>> +			dev_err(dev, "When DC is wired, DOK should"
>> +					" be wired as well.\n");
>
> Just found one nit. Don't split the strings.
>         dev_err(dev,
>                 "When DC is wired, DOK should be wired as well.\n");
I saw that one as well when I ran checkpatch, however I thought if I 
changed it then I would get a warning about the line being > 80 chars. 
So wasn't sure which direction to go.

Thanks
Chris
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>