linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: add debugfs

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:   Thu, 4 Jul 2019 06:56:56 -0700
From:   Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        dri-devel <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sean Paul <seanpaul@...omium.org>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] drm/bridge: ti-sn65dsi86: add debugfs

On Thu, Jul 4, 2019 at 5:35 AM Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, Jul 04, 2019 at 02:31:20PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> > On 02.07.2019 17:44, Rob Clark wrote:
> > > From: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> > >
> > > Add a debugfs file to show status registers.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark@...omium.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > > index f1a2493b86d9..a6f27648c015 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ti-sn65dsi86.c
> > > @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
> > >   */
> > >
> > >  #include <linux/clk.h>
> > > +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
> > >  #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> > >  #include <linux/i2c.h>
> > >  #include <linux/iopoll.h>
> > > @@ -109,6 +110,7 @@ struct ti_sn_bridge {
> > >     struct drm_dp_aux               aux;
> > >     struct drm_bridge               bridge;
> > >     struct drm_connector            connector;
> > > +   struct dentry                   *debugfs;
> > >     struct device_node              *host_node;
> > >     struct mipi_dsi_device          *dsi;
> > >     struct clk                      *refclk;
> > > @@ -178,6 +180,42 @@ static const struct dev_pm_ops ti_sn_bridge_pm_ops = {
> > >     SET_RUNTIME_PM_OPS(ti_sn_bridge_suspend, ti_sn_bridge_resume, NULL)
> > >  };
> > >
> > > +static int status_show(struct seq_file *s, void *data)
> > > +{
> > > +   struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata = s->private;
> > > +   unsigned int reg, val;
> > > +
> > > +   seq_puts(s, "STATUS REGISTERS:\n");
>
> NO NEED TO SHOUT :-)
>
> > > +
> > > +   pm_runtime_get_sync(pdata->dev);
> > > +
> > > +   /* IRQ Status Registers, see Table 31 in datasheet */
> > > +   for (reg = 0xf0; reg <= 0xf8; reg++) {
> > > +           regmap_read(pdata->regmap, reg, &val);
> > > +           seq_printf(s, "[0x%02x] = 0x%08x\n", reg, val);
> > > +   }
> > > +
> > > +   pm_runtime_put(pdata->dev);
> > > +
> > > +   return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +DEFINE_SHOW_ATTRIBUTE(status);
> > > +
> > > +static void ti_sn_debugfs_init(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
> > > +{
> > > +   pdata->debugfs = debugfs_create_dir("ti_sn65dsi86", NULL);
> >
> > If some day we will have board with two such bridges there will be a
> > problem.
>
> Could we use the platform device name for this ?

hmm, yeah, that would solve the 2x bridges issue

> > Anyway:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
> >
> > > +
> > > +   debugfs_create_file("status", 0600, pdata->debugfs, pdata,
> > > +                   &status_fops);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void ti_sn_debugfs_remove(struct ti_sn_bridge *pdata)
> > > +{
> > > +   debugfs_remove_recursive(pdata->debugfs);
> > > +   pdata->debugfs = NULL;
> > > +}
> > > +
>
> You need to conditionally-compile this based on CONFIG_DEBUG_FS.

Hmm, is that really true?  Debugfs appears to be sufficently stub'd w/
inline no-ops in the !CONFIG_DEBUG_FS case

BR,
-R