[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFLxGvy2c9KV1CyoFaD76jvThfPiotqfoeNchqjGcDp+uHie7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 22:44:08 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
To: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: concat: implement _is_locked mtd operation
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 2:08 AM Chris Packham
<chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz> wrote:
>
> Add an implementation of the _is_locked operation for concatenated mtd
> devices. As with concat_lock/concat_unlock this can simply use the
> common helper and pass mtd_is_locked as the operation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
> ---
> drivers/mtd/mtdconcat.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdconcat.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdconcat.c
> index 9514cd2db63c..0e919f3423af 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdconcat.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdconcat.c
> @@ -496,6 +496,11 @@ static int concat_unlock(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
> return __concat_xxlock(mtd, ofs, len, mtd_unlock);
> }
>
> +static int concat_is_locked(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
> +{
> + return __concat_xxlock(mtd, ofs, len, mtd_is_locked);
> +}
Hmm, here you start abusing your own new API. :(
Did you verify that the unlock/lock-functions deal correctly with all
semantics from mtd_is_locked?
i.e. mtd_is_locked() with len = 0 returns 1 for spi-nor.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists