| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <231f7423-bf13-99f8-427b-530f5446348b@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2019 18:52:02 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Mason Yang <masonccyang@...c.com.tw>, broonie@...nel.org,
marek.vasut@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, bbrezillon@...nel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
robh+dt@...nel.org, lee.jones@...aro.org
Cc: juliensu@...c.com.tw, Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
zhengxunli@...c.com.tw
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/3] spi: Add Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF SPI controller
driver
On 03/29/2019 11:20 AM, Mason Yang wrote:
> Add a driver for Renesas R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF SPI controller.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mason Yang <masonccyang@...c.com.tw>
> Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.c b/drivers/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..037f273
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-renesas-rpc.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,640 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +//
> +// Copyright (C) 2018 ~ 2019 Renesas Solutions Corp.
> +// Copyright (C) 2019 Macronix International Co., Ltd.
> +//
> +// R-Car Gen3 RPC-IF SPI/QSPI/Octa driver
> +//
> +// Author:
> +// Mason Yang <masonccyang@...c.com.tw>
> +//
> +
> +#include <linux/mfd/renesas-rpc.h>
> +#include <linux/spi/spi.h>
> +#include <linux/spi/spi-mem.h>
> +
> +#include <asm/unaligned.h>
> +
> +struct rpc_spi {
> + struct clk *clk_rpc;
> + void __iomem *base;
> + void __iomem *dirmap;
> + void __iomem *wbuf;
> + struct regmap *regmap;
Why copy struct rpc_mfd's fields?
> + u32 cur_speed_hz;
> + u32 cmd;
> + u32 addr;
> + u32 dummy;
> + u32 smcr;
> + u32 smenr;
I suggest renaming this field to 'enable'.
> + u32 xferlen;
> + u32 totalxferlen;
> + enum spi_mem_data_dir xfer_dir;
> + struct reset_control *rstc;
> +};
[...]
> +static void rpc_spi_hw_init(struct rpc_spi *rpc)
> +{
> + //
> + // NOTE: The 0x260 are undocumented bits, but they must be set.
> + // RPC_PHYCNT_STRTIM is strobe timing adjustment bit,
> + // 0x0 : the delay is biggest,
> + // 0x1 : the delay is 2nd biggest,
> + // On H3 ES1.x, the value should be 0, while on others,
> + // the value should be 6.
> + //
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_PHYCNT, RPC_PHYCNT_CAL |
> + RPC_PHYCNT_STRTIM(6) | 0x260);
> +
> + //
> + // NOTE: The 0x1511144 are undocumented bits, but they must be set
> + // for RPC_PHYOFFSET1.
> + // The 0x31 are undocumented bits, but they must be set
> + // for RPC_PHYOFFSET2.
> + //
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_PHYOFFSET1, RPC_PHYOFFSET1_DDRTMG(3) |
> + 0x1511144);
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_PHYOFFSET2, 0x31 |
> + RPC_PHYOFFSET2_OCTTMG(4));
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_SSLDR, RPC_SSLDR_SPNDL(7) |
> + RPC_SSLDR_SLNDL(7) | RPC_SSLDR_SCKDL(7));
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_CMNCR, RPC_CMNCR_MD | RPC_CMNCR_SFDE |
> + RPC_CMNCR_MOIIO_HIZ | RPC_CMNCR_IOFV_HIZ |
> + RPC_CMNCR_BSZ(0));
> +}
This function looks like a candidate to moving to the common (MFD) driver.
> +
> +static int wait_msg_xfer_end(struct rpc_spi *rpc)
> +{
> + u32 sts;
> +
> + return regmap_read_poll_timeout(rpc->regmap, RPC_CMNSR, sts,
> + sts & RPC_CMNSR_TEND, 0, USEC_PER_SEC);
> +}
This as well.
> +static void rpc_spi_mem_set_prep_op_cfg(struct spi_device *spi,
> + const struct spi_mem_op *op,
> + u64 *offs, size_t *len)
> +{
> + struct rpc_spi *rpc = spi_controller_get_devdata(spi->controller);
> +
> + rpc->cmd = RPC_SMCMR_CMD(op->cmd.opcode);
> + rpc->smenr = RPC_SMENR_CDE |
> + RPC_SMENR_CDB(ilog2(op->cmd.buswidth));
> + rpc->totalxferlen = 1;
> + rpc->xfer_dir = SPI_MEM_NO_DATA;
> + rpc->xferlen = 0;
> + rpc->addr = 0;
> +
> + if (op->addr.nbytes) {
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_ADB(ilog2(op->addr.buswidth));
> + if (op->addr.nbytes == 4)
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_ADE(0xf);
> + else
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_ADE(0x7);
> +
> + if (offs && len)
> + rpc->addr = *offs;
> + else
> + rpc->addr = op->addr.val;
> + rpc->totalxferlen += op->addr.nbytes;
> + }
> +
> + if (op->dummy.nbytes) {
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_DME;
> + rpc->dummy = RPC_SMDMCR_DMCYC(op->dummy.nbytes);
So you haven't fixed this bug? I repeat, the driver doesn't work right
w/o this fixed!
[...]
> +static ssize_t rpc_spi_mem_dirmap_read(struct spi_mem_dirmap_desc *desc,
> + u64 offs, size_t len, void *buf)
> +{
> + struct rpc_spi *rpc =
> + spi_controller_get_devdata(desc->mem->spi->controller);
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (offs + desc->info.offset + len > U32_MAX)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (len > 0x4000000)
> + len = 0x4000000;
Ugh...
> +
> + ret = rpc_spi_set_freq(rpc, desc->mem->spi->max_speed_hz);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + rpc_spi_mem_set_prep_op_cfg(desc->mem->spi,
> + &desc->info.op_tmpl, &offs, &len);
> +
> + regmap_update_bits(rpc->regmap, RPC_CMNCR, RPC_CMNCR_MD, 0);
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_DRCR, RPC_DRCR_RBURST(32) |
> + RPC_DRCR_RBE);
> +
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_DRCMR, rpc->cmd);
> + regmap_write(rpc->regmap, RPC_DREAR, RPC_DREAR_EAC(1));
So you're not even trying to support flashes larger than the read dirmap?
Now I don't think it's acceptable (and I have rewritten this code internally).
[...]
> +static ssize_t rpc_spi_mem_dirmap_write(struct spi_mem_dirmap_desc *desc,
> + u64 offs, size_t len, const void *buf)
> +{
> + struct rpc_spi *rpc =
> + spi_controller_get_devdata(desc->mem->spi->controller);
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (offs + desc->info.offset + len > U32_MAX)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + if (len > RPC_WBUF_SIZE)
> + len = RPC_WBUF_SIZE;
Ugh! Again, I no longer think this is acceptable... Maybe we just need
to drop the support of the write buffer...
[...]
> +static void rpc_spi_transfer_setup(struct rpc_spi *rpc,
> + struct spi_message *msg)
> +{
[...]
> + if (xfercnt > 2 && xfer[1].len && xfer[1].tx_buf) {
> + rpc->smenr |=
> + RPC_SMENR_ADB(ilog2((unsigned int)xfer[1].tx_nbits));
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < xfer[1].len; i++)
> + rpc->addr |= ((u8 *)xfer[1].tx_buf)[i] <<
> + (8 * (xfer[1].len - i - 1));
> +
> + if (xfer[1].len == 4)
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_ADE(0xf);
> + else
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_ADE(0x7);
> + }
> +
> + if (xfercnt > 3 && xfer[2].len && xfer[2].tx_buf) {
> + rpc->smenr |= RPC_SMENR_DME;
> + rpc->dummy = RPC_SMDMCR_DMCYC(xfer[2].len);
Needs to be multiplied by 8 (or other value) as well...
[...]
> +static int rpc_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct spi_controller *ctlr;
> + struct rpc_mfd *rpc_mfd = dev_get_drvdata(pdev->dev.parent);
> + struct rpc_spi *rpc;
> + int ret;
[...]
> + rpc->clk_rpc = rpc_mfd->clk_rpc;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->clk_rpc))
> + return PTR_ERR(rpc->clk_rpc);
> +
> + rpc->base = rpc_mfd->base;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->base))
> + return PTR_ERR(rpc->base);
> +
> + rpc->regmap = rpc_mfd->regmap;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->regmap)) {
> + dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> + "failed to regmap for rpc-spi, error %ld\n",
> + PTR_ERR(rpc->regmap));
> + return PTR_ERR(rpc->regmap);
> + }
> +
> + rpc->dirmap = rpc_mfd->dirmap;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->dirmap))
> + rpc->dirmap = NULL;
> +
> + rpc->wbuf = rpc_mfd->wbuf;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->wbuf))
> + rpc->wbuf = NULL;
> +
> + rpc->rstc = rpc_mfd->rstc;
> + if (IS_ERR(rpc->rstc))
> + return PTR_ERR(rpc->rstc);
Why do we need all this copying?
> +
> + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> + ctlr->auto_runtime_pm = true;
> +
> + ctlr->num_chipselect = 1;
> + ctlr->mem_ops = &rpc_spi_mem_ops;
> + ctlr->transfer_one_message = rpc_spi_transfer_one_message;
> +
> + ctlr->bits_per_word_mask = SPI_BPW_MASK(8);
> + ctlr->mode_bits = SPI_CPOL | SPI_CPHA | SPI_TX_QUAD | SPI_RX_QUAD;
> +
We do need pm_runtime_get_sync() here!
> + rpc_spi_hw_init(rpc);
And pm_runtime_put() here...
[...]
> +static const struct of_device_id rpc_spi_of_ids[] = {
> + { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-rpc-spi", },
> + { /* sentinel */ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rpc_spi_of_ids);
Not needed at all...
[...]
MBR, Sergei
Powered by blists - more mailing lists