linux-kernel - Re: [v8] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Add QCOM RPMh clock driver

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: <ebdc6b56-f6d6-7e63-ebc2-6d60f5d1b690@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 8 May 2018 22:27:36 +0530
From:   Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
        David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        Amit Nischal <anischal@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v8] clk: qcom: clk-rpmh: Add QCOM RPMh clock driver

Hello Stephen,

Thanks for your review comments, please check my comments below,  so 
that I could submit the next patch series.

On 5/8/2018 5:58 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-05-07 03:48:06)
>> Hello Stephen,
>>
>> Could you please let me know your comments on the below.
>>
>> On 5/4/2018 10:21 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-05-04 03:02:38)
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..944fe04
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,334 @@
>>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>>>> +/*
>>>> + * Copyright (c) 2018, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>>>> + */
>>>> +
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +struct clk_rpmh_desc {
>>>> +       struct clk_hw **clks;
>>>> +       size_t num_clks;
>>>> +};
>>>
>>> This could be replaced with the clk_hw_onecell_data struct and then the
>>> only problem becomes the const part which seems pretty impossible to fix
>>> at this point. One "workaround" is to memdup the structure. Ugh.
>>>
>>
>> Will be okay, if I can the following?
>>
>> _probe...
>> {
>>          struct clk_rpmh_desc *hw_desc_data;
>>          ....
>>
>>          hw_desc_data = kmemdup(desc, sizeof(*desc), GFP_KERNEL);
>>
>>          ...
>>          ret = devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(&pdev->dev,     of_clk_rpmh_hw_get,
>> hw_desc_data);
>>           ....
>>
>> }
>>
>> And also I fix the "getter" function.
> 
> I'd rather see the check for out of bounds number just go away, unless
> that's helping something. The kmemdup() doesn't look good.
> 

I think it is better to copy the desc data to "clk_hw_onecell_data", as 
I would also have to fix the "getter" function to check for out of bound 
numbers (idx >= num_clks).

-- 
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.

--