| 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: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703021618120.3414@hadrien>
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 16:18:56 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To: SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimran0@...il.com>
cc: outreachy-kernel <outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com>,
marvin24@....de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
ac100@...ts.launchpad.net, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGE
checkpatch checks
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, SIMRAN SINGHAL wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:31:23 PM UTC+5:30, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, SIMRAN SINGHAL wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:06:40 PM UTC+5:30, Julia
> Lawall wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, simran singhal wrote:
> >
> > > Resolve strict checkpatch USLEEP_RANGE checks by
> converting
> > delays and
> > > sleeps as described in
> > ./Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt.
> > >
> > > CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see
> > Documentation/
> > > timers/timers-howto.txt
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhal...@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > index c1feccf..cd35e64 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/nvec/nvec.c
> > > @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ static irqreturn_t
> nvec_interrupt(int irq,
> > void *dev)
> > > break;
> > > case 2: /* first byte after
> command */
> > > if (status == (I2C_SL_IRQ | RNW |
> RCVD)) {
> > > - udelay(33);
> > > + usleep_range(33, 100);
> >
> > How did you choose the upper limit.
> >
> > I believe that Greg previously suggested not to make
> these
> > changes if you
> > have no way to test them.
> >
> > Julia, After going through the reply given by Nicholas Mc
> Guire
> >
> https://www.mail-archive.com/kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org/msg16464.html
> > in this reply he has mentioned that even the range of 10
> microsecond is
> > enough,
> > so I prefer to take 100 as upper limit.
>
> Than you for the link.
>
> It looks like he suggests to change 33 to 30-40, not to 33-100.
> In any
> case, you have three choices for this kind of issue:
> 1. Don't make the change, because you can't test the result
> 2. Make the change, and explain the commit log what your
> rationale is
> 3. Make the change, and explain below the --- that you have no
> idea what
> you are doing, and you are just proposing the patch as something
> concrete
> to start a discussion.
>
> But your preference is not a suitable justification. The
> hardware does
> something, and the choice can only really be made by the person
> who knows
> what it does.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Julia I'll keep this in mind from next time.
>
> I choose the range from 33 to 100 for being on more safer side.
> Should I make it 30-40 and send v2.
I thought that the maintainer already responded saying that one shouldnot
change this code?
julia
>
> julia
>
> >
> > Simran
> >
> > julia
> >
> >
> > > if (nvec->rx->data[0] !=
> 0x01) {
> > > dev_err(nvec->dev,
> > > "Read without
> prior
> > read command\n");
> > > @@ -718,7 +718,7 @@ static irqreturn_t
> nvec_interrupt(int irq,
> > void *dev)
> > > * We experience less incomplete messages
> with this
> > delay than without
> > > * it, but we don't know why. Help is
> appreciated.
> > > */
> > > - udelay(100);
> > > + usleep_range(100, 200);
> > >
> > > return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > > }
> > > --
> > > 2.7.4
> > >
> > > --
> > > You received this message because you are subscribed
> to the
> > Google Groups "outreachy-kernel" group.
> > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving
> emails from
> > it, send an email to outreachy-kern...@...glegroups.com.
> > > To post to this group, send email to
> > outreach...@...glegroups.com.
> > > To view this discussion on the webvisithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/20170302142418.GA16
> 773%4
> > 0singhal-Inspiron-5558.
> > > For more options, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> Google Groups
> > "outreachy-kernel" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from
> it, send an
> > email to outreachy-kern...@...glegroups.com.
> > To post to this group, send email to
> outreach...@...glegroups.com.
> > To view this discussion on the webvisithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/b90bc602-cf06-4abb-
> bea2-
> > 6386d4976864%40googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "outreachy-kernel" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to outreachy-kernel+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/outreachy-kernel/4958c8a8-4b50-4567-91d8-
> 9554e9bdf7f6%40googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists