linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: tegra: probe deferral error reporting

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: <2195096.d8yV6ZqeS2@dimapc>
Date:   Sat, 21 Jul 2018 15:03:57 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>,
        "broonie@...nel.org" <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "jonathanh@...dia.com" <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        "thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        "tiwai@...e.com" <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "lgirdwood@...il.com" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        "perex@...ex.cz" <perex@...ex.cz>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ASoC: tegra: probe deferral error reporting

On Saturday, 21 July 2018 14:55:21 MSK Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> On Sat, 2018-07-21 at 14:17 +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 
> > On Saturday, 21 July 2018 12:56:15 MSK Mark Brown wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:31:07PM +0000, Marcel Ziswiler wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Fri, 2018-07-20 at 13:16 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > >  	ac97->sync_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(pdev-
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >dev.of_node,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >  	
> > > > > >  	
> > > > > >  					    "nvidia,codec-
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > sync-
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > gpio", 0);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  	if (!gpio_is_valid(ac97->sync_gpio)) {
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no codec-sync GPIO
> > > > > > supplied\n");
> > > > > > +		ret = ac97->sync_gpio;
> > > > > > +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no codec-sync GPIO
> > > > > > supplied:
> > > > > > %d\n", ret);
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  		goto err_clk_put;
> > > > > >  	
> > > > > >  	
> > > > > >  	}
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > This isn't reporting an error code associated with the attempt
> > > > > to
> > > > > find a
> > > > > codec-sync GPIO, it's the result of some other operation.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > What exactly is then the of_get_named_gpio() above please doing
> > > > if
> > > > not getting the codec sync GPIO? I am not following you, sorry.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It's not in any way involved in setting the value of ret, whatever
> > > value
> > > that has it's nothing to do with that operation.
> > 
> > 
> > The comment to gpio_is_valid() says that it "Returns GPIO number to
> > use with 
> > Linux generic GPIO API, or one of the errno value on the error
> > condition". 
> > Comment doesn't explicitly states that the returned GPIO number is
> > always 
> > valid, but it is kinda implied.
> 
> 
> Do you mean I should be assigning the return value of gpio_is_valid()
> to ret and use that instead?

No, gpio_is_valid() returns a boolean. I think your patch is fine as it is is.

Probably Mark meant something like this:

        ac97->sync_gpio = of_get_named_gpio(pdev->dev.of_node,
                                            "nvidia,codec-sync-gpio", 0);
        if (ac97->sync_gpio < 0) {
                ret = ac97->sync_gpio;
                dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no codec-sync GPIO supplied: %d\n", ret);
                goto err_clk_put;
        }

        if (!gpio_is_valid(ac97->sync_gpio)) {
                ret = -EINVAL;
                goto err_clk_put;
       }

But that is not needed because of_get_named_gpio() returns either a valid GPIO 
number or a error code.