linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 12/14] regmap: SoundWire: Add regmap support for SoundWire bus

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: <20161102081131.GA31046@intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Nov 2016 13:41:31 +0530
From:   Hardik Shah <hardik.t.shah@...el.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        tiwai@...e.de, pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com,
        lgirdwood@...il.com, plai@...eaurora.org, patches.audio@...el.com,
        Sanyog Kale <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 12/14] regmap: SoundWire: Add regmap support for SoundWire
 bus

On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 07:03:55PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 06:11:10PM +0530, Hardik Shah wrote:
> 
> > +static inline void get_t_size(size_t *t_val_size, size_t *t_size,
> > +						int *reg_addr,
> > +						int *offset,
> > +						size_t *val_size)
> > +{
> > +
> > +		*t_val_size += *t_size;
> > +		*offset += *t_size;
> 
> So, I started by taking a look at this patch to get a sense of what the
> API would look like and I see that we're not following CodingStyle with
> everything indented twice :(
> 

Sorry Mark for delayed response, there was festival holidays in India, so I
was not able to reply. 

Regarding two tabs, it got missed for this function somehow, I will fix it
in next patchset.

> > +static int regmap_sdw_gather_write(void *context,
> > +			   const void *reg, size_t reg_size,
> > +			   const void *val, size_t val_size)
> > +{
> 
> > +	if (!sdw)
> > +		return 0;
> 
> Silently ignoring errors :(
> 

This should never happen ideally. This was extra check to make sure there is
not kernel crash. I can remove it as well.

> > +	if (val_size > SDW_MAX_REG_ADDR)
> > +		t_size = SDW_MAX_REG_ADDR - reg_command;
> > +	else
> > +		t_size = val_size;
> 
> This needs at least some kind of comment?


I will add few comments here.


--