linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] usb: dwc3: qcom: Add support for booting with ACPI

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]

Date:   Tue, 4 Jun 2019 23:35:07 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     alokc@...eaurora.org, kramasub@...eaurora.org,
        andy.gross@...aro.org, david.brown@...aro.org,
        wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        balbi@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jlhugo@...il.com, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] usb: dwc3: qcom: Add support for booting with ACPI

On Tue 04 Jun 03:44 PDT 2019, Lee Jones wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-qcom.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-qcom.c
[..]
> @@ -373,7 +416,7 @@ static int dwc3_qcom_clk_init(struct dwc3_qcom *qcom, int count)
>  
>  	qcom->num_clocks = count;
>  
> -	if (!count)
> +	if (!count || ACPI_HANDLE(dev))
>  		return 0;

Afaict you call this with count = of_count_phandle_with_args(), which
should be 0. But why not skip calling this at all?

>  
>  	qcom->clks = devm_kcalloc(dev, qcom->num_clocks,
> @@ -409,12 +452,28 @@ static int dwc3_qcom_clk_init(struct dwc3_qcom *qcom, int count)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static const struct dwc3_acpi_pdata sdm845_acpi_pdata = {
> +	.qscratch_base_offset = SDM845_QSCRATCH_BASE_OFFSET,
> +	.qscratch_base_size = SDM845_QSCRATCH_SIZE,
> +	.dwc3_core_base_size = SDM845_DWC3_CORE_SIZE,
> +	.hs_phy_irq_index = 1,
> +	.dp_hs_phy_irq_index = 4,
> +	.dm_hs_phy_irq_index = 3,
> +	.ss_phy_irq_index = 2
> +};
> +
> +static const struct acpi_device_id dwc3_qcom_acpi_match[] = {
> +	{ "QCOM2430", (unsigned long)&sdm845_acpi_pdata },
> +	{ },
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, dwc3_qcom_acpi_match);

Analog to of_device_get_match_data() there seems to be a
acpi_device_get_match_data(), if you use this you should be able to
have you acpi_device_id array next to the of_device_id.

> +
>  static int dwc3_qcom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)

It seems that all that's left unconditional on ACPI_HANDLE() in this
function are the optional pieces and the tail. Wouldn't it be cleaner to
split it out in different functions?

Regards,
Bjorn