linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache properties early

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: <20180517154701.GA20281@e107155-lin>
Date:   Thu, 17 May 2018 16:47:01 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
        Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
        Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Xiongfeng Wang <wangxiongfeng2@...wei.com>,
        vkilari@...eaurora.org, Al Stone <ahs3@...hat.com>,
        Dietmar.Eggemann@....com, Morten.Rasmussen@....com,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, austinwc@...eaurora.org,
        tnowicki@...iumnetworks.com, jhugo@...eaurora.org,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 02/12] drivers: base: cacheinfo: setup DT cache
 properties early

On 16/05/18 11:56, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> On 15/05/18 20:32, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 8:15 PM, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com> wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2018 06:57 PM, Jeremy Linton wrote:
>>
>>>>   -     cache_size = of_get_property(this_leaf->of_node, propname, NULL);
>>>> +       cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
>>>>         if (cache_size)
>>>>                 this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
>>
>> Can't you switch to of_read_property_uXX() variant here?
>>
> 
> This patch is just changing the first argument to the calls. So if we
> need to change, it has to be separate patch.
> 
> Now, we can use of_property_read_u64() but is there any particular
> reason you mention that ? One reason I can see is that we can avoid
> making explicit of_get_property call. Just wanted to the motive before I
> can write the patch.
> 

Is below patch does what you were looking for ?

Regards,
Sudeep

--
>From 71f1c10ddb5915a92fa74d38a4e2406d0ab27845 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 13:45:53 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] drivers: base: cacheinfo: use OF property_read_u64 instead of
 get_property,read_number

of_property_read_u64 searches for a property in a device node and read
a 64-bit value from it. Instead of using of_get_property to get the
property and then read 64-bit value using of_read_number, we can make
use of of_property_read_u64.

Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
---
 drivers/base/cacheinfo.c | 24 +++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
index 2880e2ab01f5..56715014f07b 100644
--- a/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
+++ b/drivers/base/cacheinfo.c
@@ -74,22 +74,21 @@ static inline int get_cacheinfo_idx(enum cache_type type)
 static void cache_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *cache_size;
+	u64 cache_size;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].size_prop;
 
-	cache_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (cache_size)
-		this_leaf->size = of_read_number(cache_size, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &cache_size))
+		this_leaf->size = cache_size;
 }
 
 /* not cache_line_size() because that's a macro in include/linux/cache.h */
 static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 				struct device_node *np)
 {
-	const __be32 *line_size;
+	u64 line_size;
 	int i, lim, ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
@@ -99,27 +98,26 @@ static void cache_get_line_size(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf,
 		const char *propname;
 
 		propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].line_size_props[i];
-		line_size = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-		if (line_size)
+		line_size = of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &line_size);
+		if (line_size) {
+			this_leaf->coherency_line_size = line_size;
 			break;
+		}
 	}
 
-	if (line_size)
-		this_leaf->coherency_line_size = of_read_number(line_size, 1);
 }
 
 static void cache_nr_sets(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf, struct device_node *np)
 {
 	const char *propname;
-	const __be32 *nr_sets;
+	u64 nr_sets;
 	int ct_idx;
 
 	ct_idx = get_cacheinfo_idx(this_leaf->type);
 	propname = cache_type_info[ct_idx].nr_sets_prop;
 
-	nr_sets = of_get_property(np, propname, NULL);
-	if (nr_sets)
-		this_leaf->number_of_sets = of_read_number(nr_sets, 1);
+	if (!of_property_read_u64(np, propname, &nr_sets))
+		this_leaf->number_of_sets = nr_sets;
 }
 
 static void cache_associativity(struct cacheinfo *this_leaf)
-- 
2.7.4