Message-ID: <CAK8P3a2zkA5Tp4En+=zLBes4YRedHcn9xf1DhBsRufqPWrzvVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Sep 2017 21:51:43 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Oleksandr Shamray <oleksandrs@...lanox.com>
Cc:     gregkh <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
        Jiří Pírko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Tobias Klauser <tklauser@...tanz.ch>,
        linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, mec@...ut.net, vadimp@...llanox.com,
        system-sw-low-level@...lanox.com, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        openocd-devel-owner@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [patch v8 1/4] drivers: jtag: Add JTAG core driver

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 6:13 PM, Oleksandr Shamray
<oleksandrs@...lanox.com> wrote:
> Initial patch for JTAG driver
> JTAG class driver provide infrastructure to support hardware/software
> JTAG platform drivers. It provide user layer API interface for flashing
> and debugging external devices which equipped with JTAG interface
> using standard transactions.
>
> Driver exposes set of IOCTL to user space for:
> - XFER:
> - SIR (Scan Instruction Register, IEEE 1149.1 Data Register scan);
> - SDR (Scan Data Register, IEEE 1149.1 Instruction Register scan);
> - RUNTEST (Forces the IEEE 1149.1 bus to a run state for a specified
>   number of clocks).
> - SIOCFREQ/GIOCFREQ for setting and reading JTAG frequency.
>
> Driver core provides set of internal APIs for allocation and
> registration:
> - jtag_register;
> - jtag_unregister;
> - jtag_alloc;
> - jtag_free;
>
> Platform driver on registration with jtag-core creates the next
> entry in dev folder:
> /dev/jtagX
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleksandr Shamray <oleksandrs@...lanox.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>

My Ack was actually just for the device driver part, I had not
looked at the core again, sorry for not being clearer here.

The other two patches are fine, but looking at this one again,
I find a couple of things to improve:

> +
> +static __u64 jtag_copy_from_user(__u64 udata, unsigned long bit_size)
> +{
> +       unsigned long size;
> +       void *kdata;
> +
> +       size = DIV_ROUND_UP(bit_size, BITS_PER_BYTE);
> +       kdata = memdup_user(u64_to_user_ptr(udata), size);
> +
> +       return (__u64)(uintptr_t)kdata;
> +}
> +
> +static unsigned long jtag_copy_to_user(__u64 udata, __u64 kdata,
> +                                      unsigned long bit_size)
> +{
> +       unsigned long size;
> +
> +       size = DIV_ROUND_UP(bit_size, BITS_PER_BYTE);
> +
> +       return copy_to_user(u64_to_user_ptr(udata), jtag_u64_to_ptr(kdata),
> +                           size);
> +}

Only a style comment, but the casting to and from u64 multiple
times here seems overly complicated. Why not use a regular kernel
pointer here, and then pass that as a third argument to
ag->ops->xfer() ?

> +
> +       case JTAG_SIOCFREQ:
> +               err = __get_user(value, uarg);

This needs to use get_user(), not __get_user(). I think you changed
all the other instances after an earlier comment, but missed this one.

> +static int jtag_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> +       struct jtag *jtag = container_of(inode->i_cdev, struct jtag, cdev);
> +
> +       spin_lock(&jtag->lock);
> +
> +       if (jtag->open) {
> +               dev_info(NULL, "jtag already opened\n");
> +               spin_unlock(&jtag->lock);
> +               return -EBUSY;
> +       }
> +
> +       jtag->open++;
> +       file->private_data = jtag;
> +       spin_unlock(&jtag->lock);
> +       return 0;
> +}

The spinlock seems to not protect anything but the use count,
so this could be an atomic_t.


> +       mutex_lock(&jtag_mutex);
> +       list_add_tail(&jtag->list, &jtag_list);
> +       mutex_unlock(&jtag_mutex);

Similarly, you only use the mutex to protect the list_add/list_del,
but nothing ever walks the list, so I think you can simply remove
both the list and the mutex.

> +static int __init jtag_init(void)
> +{
> +       int err;
> +
> +       err = alloc_chrdev_region(&jtag_devt, 0, 1, "jtag");
> +       if (err)
> +               return err;
> +       return class_register(&jtag_class);
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit jtag_exit(void)
> +{
> +       class_unregister(&jtag_class);
> +}

This looks a bit asymmetric:

- you allocate a chardev region but don't destroy it in jtag_exit,
  so presumably this leaks a major number allocation each
  time you load/unload the module

- you allocate a single minor number at module load time,
  but the individual devices each get another number, and
  the original one does not appear to be used, unless I
  misunderstand the API here.

     Arnd

Powered by blists - more mailing lists