linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drivers: regulator: qcom: add PMS405 SPMI regulator

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: <20190204090301.GC23441@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Mon, 4 Feb 2019 10:03:01 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@...aro.org>
Cc:     lgirdwood@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, vinod.koul@...aro.org,
        niklas.cassel@...aro.org, khasim.mohammed@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drivers: regulator: qcom: add PMS405 SPMI regulator

On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 12:45:03PM +0100, Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz wrote:

> @@ -653,6 +708,10 @@ spmi_regulator_find_range(struct spmi_regulator *vreg)
>  	range = vreg->set_points->range;
>  	end = range + vreg->set_points->count;
>  
> +	/* we know we only have one range for this type */
> +	if (vreg->logical_type == SPMI_REGULATOR_LOGICAL_TYPE_HFS430)
> +		return range;
> +
>  	spmi_vreg_read(vreg, SPMI_COMMON_REG_VOLTAGE_RANGE, &range_sel, 1);
>  
>  	for (; range < end; range++)

Rather than have special casing for the logical type in here it seems
better to just provide a specific op for this logical type, you could
always make _find_range() call into that one if you really want code
reuse here.  You already have separate ops for this regulator type
anyway.

> +static unsigned int spmi_regulator_hfs430_get_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
> +{
> +	struct spmi_regulator *vreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> +	u8 reg;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = spmi_vreg_read(vreg, SPMI_HFS430_REG_MODE, &reg, 1);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_err(&rdev->dev, "failed to get mode");
> +		return ret;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (reg == SPMI_HFS430_MODE_PWM)
> +		return REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL;
> +
> +	return REGULATOR_MODE_IDLE;
> +}

I'd have expected a switch statement here, ideally flagging a warning or
error if we get a surprising value in there.

> +static int spmi_regulator_hfs430_set_mode(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
> +					  unsigned int mode)
> +{
> +	struct spmi_regulator *vreg = rdev_get_drvdata(rdev);
> +	u8 reg = mode == REGULATOR_MODE_NORMAL ? SPMI_HFS430_MODE_PWM :
> +						 SPMI_HFS430_MODE_AUTO;

Please write a normal if statement (or switch statement) to help
legibility.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)