linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] spi: Add QuadSPI driver for Atmel SAMA5D2

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]

Date:   Wed, 20 Jun 2018 16:31:13 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Piotr Bugalski <bugalski.piotr@...il.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
cc:     Piotr Bugalski <bugalski.piotr@...il.com>,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
        Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...rochip.com>,
        Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>,
        Piotr Bugalski <pbu@...ptera.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] spi: Add QuadSPI driver for Atmel SAMA5D2

Hi Mark,

Thank you very much for quick answer.

On Tue, 19 Jun 2018, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 06:21:23PM +0200, Piotr Bugalski wrote:
>
>> +static int atmel_qspi_adjust_op_size(struct spi_mem *mem, struct spi_mem_op *op)
>> +{
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>
> If this can be empty should we adjust the callers to allow it to just be
> omitted?
>

If I remember well some commits ago spi-mem required even empty 
adjust_op_size. Now it seems unnecessary, but I forgot to remove the 
code. I will fix it in next version.

>> +static int atmel_qspi_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct spi_controller *ctrl = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +	struct atmel_qspi *aq = spi_controller_get_devdata(ctrl);
>> +
>> +	qspi_writel(aq, QSPI_CR, QSPI_CR_QSPIDIS);
>> +	clk_disable_unprepare(aq->clk);
>> +
>> +	spi_unregister_controller(ctrl);
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>
> You should unregister the controller before disabling the hardware,
> otherwise something could come in and try to start an operation on the
> controller (or already be running one) while the hardware is disabled
> which might blow up.
>

Sure, deinit should be done in reverse order of init, you are perfectly 
right, just my mistake. I'll fix it in next version.

Best Regards,
Piotr