| 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: <e49a3dfd-973c-00fb-159a-8ceb13bd0247@smarthome-wolf.de>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 11:43:30 +0200
From: Marcus Wolf <marcus.wolf@...rthome-wolf.de>
To: Simon Sandström <simon@...anor.nu>,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: linux@...f-Entwicklungen.de, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] staging: pi433: Combine all
rf69_set_amplifier_x()
Am 06.12.2017 um 00:08 schrieb Simon Sandström:
> Replaces the functions rf69_set_amplifier_1, _2, _3 with two
> functions: rf69_enable_amplifier(dev, amp_mask) and
> rf69_disable_amplifier(dev, amp_mask).
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Sandström <simon@...anor.nu>
> ---
> drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c | 6 +++---
> drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c | 46 ++++------------------------------------
> drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h | 8 ++-----
> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> index 3b4170b9ba94..688d0cf00782 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/pi433_if.c
> @@ -1126,9 +1126,9 @@ static int pi433_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> /* setup the radio module */
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_mode (spi, standby));
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_data_mode (spi, DATAMODUL_MODE_PACKET));
> - SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_amplifier_0 (spi, OPTION_ON));
> - SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_amplifier_1 (spi, OPTION_OFF));
> - SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_amplifier_2 (spi, OPTION_OFF));
> + SET_CHECKED(rf69_enable_amplifier(spi, MASK_PALEVEL_PA0));
> + SET_CHECKED(rf69_disable_amplifier(spi, MASK_PALEVEL_PA1));
> + SET_CHECKED(rf69_disable_amplifier(spi, MASK_PALEVEL_PA2));
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_output_power_level (spi, 13));
> SET_CHECKED(rf69_set_antenna_impedance (spi, fiftyOhm));
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c
> index 4c9eb97978ef..c97c65ea8acd 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.c
> @@ -262,52 +262,14 @@ int rf69_set_frequency(struct spi_device *spi, u32 frequency)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_0(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off)
> +int rf69_enable_amplifier(struct spi_device *spi, u8 amplifier_mask)
> {
> - #ifdef DEBUG
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: amp #0");
> - #endif
> -
> - switch (option_on_off) {
> - case OPTION_ON: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) | MASK_PALEVEL_PA0));
> - case OPTION_OFF: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) & ~MASK_PALEVEL_PA0));
> - default:
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: illegal input param");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -}
> -
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_1(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off)
> -{
> - #ifdef DEBUG
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: amp #1");
> - #endif
> -
> - switch (option_on_off) {
> - case OPTION_ON: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) | MASK_PALEVEL_PA1));
> - case OPTION_OFF: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) & ~MASK_PALEVEL_PA1));
> - default:
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: illegal input param");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> + return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) | amplifier_mask));
> }
>
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_2(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off)
> +int rf69_disable_amplifier(struct spi_device *spi, u8 amplifier_mask)
> {
> - #ifdef DEBUG
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: amp #2");
> - #endif
> -
> - switch (option_on_off) {
> - case OPTION_ON: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) | MASK_PALEVEL_PA2));
> - case OPTION_OFF: return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) & ~MASK_PALEVEL_PA2));
> - default:
> - dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "set: illegal input param");
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> + return WRITE_REG(REG_PALEVEL, (READ_REG(REG_PALEVEL) & ~amplifier_mask));
> }
>
> int rf69_set_output_power_level(struct spi_device *spi, u8 powerLevel)
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h
> index 18296b4502f3..ba25ab6aeae7 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/pi433/rf69.h
> @@ -33,12 +33,8 @@ int rf69_set_modulation_shaping(struct spi_device *spi, enum mod_shaping mod_sha
> int rf69_set_bit_rate(struct spi_device *spi, u16 bitRate);
> int rf69_set_deviation(struct spi_device *spi, u32 deviation);
> int rf69_set_frequency(struct spi_device *spi, u32 frequency);
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_0(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off);
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_1(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off);
> -int rf69_set_amplifier_2(struct spi_device *spi,
> - enum option_on_off option_on_off);
> +int rf69_enable_amplifier(struct spi_device *spi, u8 amplifier_mask);
> +int rf69_disable_amplifier(struct spi_device *spi, u8 amplifier_mask);
> int rf69_set_output_power_level(struct spi_device *spi, u8 powerLevel);
> int rf69_set_pa_ramp(struct spi_device *spi, enum paRamp paRamp);
> int rf69_set_antenna_impedance(struct spi_device *spi, enum antennaImpedance antennaImpedance);
>
Hi Simon,
I am sorry. I don't like that.
You expand to two functions, to get the luxury of having an enable and a
disable function.
On the other hand, you colapse from 3 function - one for each amp - to a
single, taking the amp number as argument.
Although I don't see the big benefit, in programming theory this might
be a better solution.
But the old implementation reflects the hardware and the datasheet,
since the chip does not have a register to enable and a register to
disable, taking the amp number, but the chip has three bits, saying on
or off.
For someone, not reading the code as a "novel", but work with it, he for
sure will read the datasheet. Then the new construction will be
uncomfortable for him.
I tried to reflect the chip in every function I wrote. And the DEFINES
in rf69.h are (almost) exactly named, as the you'll find the namings in
the datasheet. That eases working with such a complex chip a lot.
Sorry,
Marcus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists