| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAKXjFTMFF=qRkJzOLkzGWgmFMd3tUeVqg6c0=Ocr3Z7eBq4NYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 11:22:36 +0100
From: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
To: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>, kishon@...com,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v5,3/5] USB: ohci: da8xx: Allow a regulator to handle VBUS
Hi David,
Thanks for the review,
On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:31 AM, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com> wrote:
> On 11/14/2016 08:41 AM, ahaslam@...libre.com wrote:
>>
>> Using a regulator to handle VBUS will eliminate the need for
>> platform data and callbacks, and make the driver more generic
>> allowing different types of regulators to handle VBUS.
>>
>> The regulator equivalents to the platform callbacks are:
>> set_power -> regulator_enable/regulator_disable
>> get_power -> regulator_is_enabled
>> get_oci -> regulator_get_error_flags
>> ocic_notify -> regulator event notification
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Axel Haslam <ahaslam@...libre.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/usb/host/ohci-da8xx.c | 95
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 93 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-da8xx.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-da8xx.c
>> index 83e3c98..42eaeb9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-da8xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-da8xx.c
>> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
>> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>> #include <linux/phy/phy.h>
>> #include <linux/platform_data/usb-davinci.h>
>> +#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>> #include <linux/usb.h>
>> #include <linux/usb/hcd.h>
>> #include <asm/unaligned.h>
>> @@ -36,8 +37,12 @@ static int (*orig_ohci_hub_control)(struct usb_hcd
>> *hcd, u16 typeReq,
>> static int (*orig_ohci_hub_status_data)(struct usb_hcd *hcd, char *buf);
>>
>> struct da8xx_ohci_hcd {
>> + struct usb_hcd *hcd;
>> struct clk *usb11_clk;
>> struct phy *usb11_phy;
>> + struct regulator *vbus_reg;
>> + struct notifier_block nb;
>> + unsigned int is_powered;
>
>
> Since is_powered is only used to indicate if we have called
> regulator_enable(), I think it would make more sense to name it reg_enabled
> instead.
ok.
>
>> };
>>
>> #define to_da8xx_ohci(hcd) (struct da8xx_ohci_hcd
>> *)(hcd_to_ohci(hcd)->priv)
>> @@ -83,56 +88,103 @@ static void ohci_da8xx_disable(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>>
>> static int ohci_da8xx_set_power(struct usb_hcd *hcd, int on)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>> + int ret;
>>
>> if (hub && hub->set_power)
>> return hub->set_power(1, on);
>>
>> + if (!da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + if (on && !da8xx_ohci->is_powered) {
>> + ret = regulator_enable(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "Fail to enable regulator: %d\n",
>> ret);
>
>
> s/Fail/Failed/
will fix in both places.
>
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + da8xx_ohci->is_powered = 1;
>> +
>> + } else if (!on && da8xx_ohci->is_powered) {
>> + ret = regulator_disable(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "Fail to disable regulator: %d\n",
>> ret);
>
>
> s/Fail/Failed/
>
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> + da8xx_ohci->is_powered = 0;
>> + }
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static int ohci_da8xx_get_power(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>>
>> if (hub && hub->get_power)
>> return hub->get_power(1);
>>
>> + if (da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)
>> + return regulator_is_enabled(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg);
>> +
>> return 1;
>> }
>>
>> static int ohci_da8xx_get_oci(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>> + unsigned int flags;
>> + int ret;
>>
>> if (hub && hub->get_oci)
>> return hub->get_oci(1);
>>
>> + if (!da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + ret = regulator_get_error_flags(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg, &flags);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> +
>> + if (flags && REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT)
>
>
> Is this supposed to be...
yes!
>
> if (flags & REGULATOR_ERROR_OVER_CURRENT)
>
>
>> + return 1;
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static int ohci_da8xx_has_set_power(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>>
>> if (hub && hub->set_power)
>> return 1;
>>
>> + if (da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)
>> + return 1;
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> static int ohci_da8xx_has_oci(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>>
>> if (hub && hub->get_oci)
>> return 1;
>>
>> + if (da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)
>> + return 1;
>> +
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -160,15 +212,41 @@ static void ohci_da8xx_ocic_handler(struct
>> da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub,
>> hub->set_power(port, 0);
>> }
>>
>> +static int ohci_da8xx_regulator_event(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> + unsigned long event, void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci =
>> + container_of(nb, struct da8xx_ohci_hcd,
>> nb);
>> + struct device *dev = da8xx_ohci->hcd->self.controller;
>> +
>> + if (event & REGULATOR_EVENT_OVER_CURRENT) {
>> + dev_warn(dev, "over current event\n");
>
>
> Won't this result in duplicate overcurrent warnings in the kernel log? It
> seems like in previous version of this patch series, we would get an
> overcurrent error from the core usb driver.
you mean in the regulator driver? i did not make changes to core usb.
but, no, i did not add a print in the fixed regulator driver itself. Since
the regulator is a separate driver, and could be implemented with or without
a trace, i think its better to leave this print. It shows that the usb driver
has well received the notification.
>
>> + ocic_mask |= 1;
>
>
> I thought that a previous patch got rid of all globals. Why is ocic_mask
> still a global variable?
>
its is used in the platform callbacks which will be removed,
and i will remove it in future series. but you already saw this ;)
>> + ohci_da8xx_set_power(da8xx_ohci->hcd, 0);
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int ohci_da8xx_register_notify(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> {
>> + struct da8xx_ohci_hcd *da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> struct device *dev = hcd->self.controller;
>> struct da8xx_ohci_root_hub *hub = dev_get_platdata(dev);
>> + int ret = 0;
>>
>> if (hub && hub->ocic_notify)
>> - return hub->ocic_notify(ohci_da8xx_ocic_handler);
>> + ret = hub->ocic_notify(ohci_da8xx_ocic_handler);
>
>
> nit: add { } around the if body too since there is { } around the else if
> body.
will do.
>
>> + else if (da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg) {
>> + da8xx_ohci->nb.notifier_call = ohci_da8xx_regulator_event;
>> + ret =
>> devm_regulator_register_notifier(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg,
>> + &da8xx_ohci->nb);
>> + }
>>
>> - return 0;
>> + if (ret)
>> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to register notifier: %d\n", ret);
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> }
>>
>> static void ohci_da8xx_unregister_notify(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
>> @@ -331,6 +409,7 @@ static int ohci_da8xx_probe(struct platform_device
>> *pdev)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> da8xx_ohci = to_da8xx_ohci(hcd);
>> + da8xx_ohci->hcd = hcd;
>>
>> da8xx_ohci->usb11_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "usb11");
>> if (IS_ERR(da8xx_ohci->usb11_clk)) {
>> @@ -348,6 +427,18 @@ static int ohci_da8xx_probe(struct platform_device
>> *pdev)
>> goto err;
>> }
>>
>> + da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg = devm_regulator_get_optional(&pdev->dev,
>> "vbus");
>> + if (IS_ERR(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg)) {
>> + error = PTR_ERR(da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg);
>> + if (error == -ENODEV) {
>> + da8xx_ohci->vbus_reg = NULL;
>> + } else {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
>> + "Failed to get regulator: %d\n", error);
>
>
> I'm pretty sure that the probe error number is displayed elsewhere in the
> kernel log, so probably no need for %d here.
Ok i will remove the %d.
>
>> + goto err;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> mem = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>> hcd->regs = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, mem);
>> if (IS_ERR(hcd->regs)) {
>>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists