linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 7/7] i2c: fsi: Add bus recovery

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <c9d0b0c8-268f-04af-7c43-6fec0e272a9d@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:32:45 -0500
From:   Eddie James <eajames@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        benh@...nel.crashing.org, joel@....id.au, mark.rutland@....com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
        andy.shevchenko@...il.com, peda@...ntia.se
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 7/7] i2c: fsi: Add bus recovery



On 06/25/2018 09:38 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 02:36:19PM -0500, Eddie James wrote:
>> Bus recovery should reset the engine and force clock the bus 9 times
>> to recover most situations.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eddie James <eajames@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>   1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c
>> index d6cab4b..940b198 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-fsi.c
>> @@ -611,6 +611,24 @@ static u32 fsi_i2c_functionality(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>>   		I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BLOCK_DATA;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int fsi_i2c_recover_bus(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>> +{
>> +	int rc;
>> +	struct fsi_i2c_port *port = adap->algo_data;
>> +	struct fsi_i2c_master *master = port->master;
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&master->lock);
>> +
>> +	rc = fsi_i2c_reset(master, port->port);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&master->lock);
>> +	return rc;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct i2c_bus_recovery_info fsi_i2c_bus_recovery_info = {
>> +	.recover_bus = fsi_i2c_recover_bus,
>> +};
>> +
> This all won't have any effect since you never call i2c_recover_bus
> which calls back into i2c_bus_recovery_info callbacks.

Ah, I thought there would be some use of this in the core or in client 
drivers, or some ioctl interface. Would there be any outside users of 
these callbacks in the future?