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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 09:59:53 +0100 From: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> Cc: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Kevin Hilman <khilman@...libre.com>, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] reset: add support for non-DT systems 2018-02-13 20:17 GMT+01:00 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 8:39 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote: >> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com> >> >> The reset framework only supports device-tree. There are some platforms >> however, which need to use it even in legacy, board-file based mode. >> >> An example of such architecture is the DaVinci family of SoCs which >> supports both device tree and legacy boot modes and we don't want to >> introduce any regressions. >> >> We're currently working on converting the platform from its hand-crafted >> clock API to using the common clock framework. Part of the overhaul will >> be representing the chip's power sleep controller's reset lines using >> the reset framework. >> >> This changeset extends the core reset code with a new field in the >> reset controller struct which contains an array of lookup entries. Each >> entry contains the device name and an additional, optional identifier >> string. >> >> Drivers can register a set of reset lines using this lookup table and >> concerned devices can access them using the regular reset_control API. >> >> This new function is only called as a fallback in case the of_node >> field is NULL and doesn't change anything for current users. >> >> Tested with a dummy reset driver with several lookup entries. >> >> An example lookup table can look like this: >> >> static const struct reset_lookup foobar_reset_lookup[] = { >> [FOO_RESET] = { .dev = "foo", .id = "foo_id" }, >> [BAR_RESET] = { .dev = "bar", .id = NULL }, >> { } >> }; >> >> where FOO_RESET and BAR_RESET will correspond with the id parameters >> of reset callbacks. > >> +static struct reset_control * >> +__reset_control_get_from_lookup(struct device *dev, const char *id, >> + bool shared, bool optional) >> +{ >> + struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev; >> + const char *dev_id = dev_name(dev); >> + struct reset_control *rstc = NULL; >> + const struct reset_lookup *lookup; >> + int index; >> + >> + mutex_lock(&reset_list_mutex); >> + >> + list_for_each_entry(rcdev, &reset_controller_list, list) { >> + if (!rcdev->lookup) >> + continue; >> + >> + lookup = rcdev->lookup; > >> + for (index = 0; lookup->dev; index++, lookup++) { >> + if (strcmp(dev_id, lookup->dev)) >> + continue; >> + >> + if ((!id && !lookup->id) || >> + (id && lookup->id && !strcmp(id, lookup->id))) { >> + rstc = __reset_control_get_internal(rcdev, >> + index, shared); >> + break; >> + } > > Wouldn't be slightly more readable > > if (id && lookup->id) { > if (strcmp(id, lookup->id)) > continue; > } else if (id || lookup->id) { > continue; > } > > rstc = __reset_control_get_internal(rcdev, index, shared); > break; > You'd get less indentations, yes but I wanted to emphasize the condition on which we want to stop in this line. >> + } >> + } >> + >> + mutex_unlock(&reset_list_mutex); >> + > >> + if (!rstc) >> + return optional ? NULL : ERR_PTR(-ENOENT); > > Isn't simpler > > if (!optional && !rstc) // or other way around, depending which might > be more offten > return ERR_PTR(...); > IMO it's just a matter of taste. Thanks, Bartosz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists