linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: support ROHM BD28623 codec

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20180221122639.GH8334@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Wed, 21 Feb 2018 12:26:39 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Katsuhiro Suzuki <suzuki.katsuhiro@...ionext.com>
Cc:     alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@...aro.org>,
        Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: support ROHM BD28623 codec

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 01:33:11PM +0900, Katsuhiro Suzuki wrote:

> +++ b/sound/soc/codecs/bd28623.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,258 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * ROHM BD28623MUV class D speaker amplifier codec driver.
> + *

Please make the entire comment C++ so this looks intentional.

> +		dev_err(dev, "Failed to enable supplies: %d\n", ret);
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	gpiod_set_value(bd->reset_gpio, 0);

Since this GPIO is not needed in atomic contexts you should use the
_cansleep() versions of the GPIO functions - it doesn't cost you
anything and means that if for some reason someone wired this up to a
GPIO that can't be used in atomic context the driver will just work.

> +	bd->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "reset",
> +						 GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);

> +	bd->mute_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "mute",
> +						GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);

These properties were documented as mandatory in the binding but are
optional here.  It's fine that they're optional but I'd expect the
binding to be consistent with this.

> +static int bd28623_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct bd28623_priv *bd = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> +
> +	regulator_bulk_disable(ARRAY_SIZE(bd->supplies), bd->supplies);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

We don't enable the supplies explicitly as part of the probe function so
it feels wrong to disable on remove() - I'm sure it is fine in practice
as-is but I'd have to think too hard to confirm that.  I'd put this in a
component level remove function instead so that it's consistent.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)