linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] mtd: spi-nor: Split spi_nor_init

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:   Sun, 25 Aug 2019 14:51:41 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To:     <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
Cc:     <marek.vasut@...il.com>, <vigneshr@...com>,
        <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>,
        <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] mtd: spi-nor: Split spi_nor_init_params()

On Sun, 25 Aug 2019 12:23:45 +0000
<Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:

> On 08/25/2019 03:03 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > External E-Mail
> > 
> > 
> > On Sat, 24 Aug 2019 12:00:43 +0000
> > <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> >>
> >> Add functions to delimit what the chunks of code do:
> >>
> >> static void spi_nor_init_params()
> >> {
> >> 	spi_nor_legacy_init_params()
> >> 	spi_nor_manufacturer_init_params()
> >> 	spi_nor_sfdp_init_params()
> >> }
> >>
> >> Add descriptions to all methods.
> >>
> >> spi_nor_init_params() becomes of type void, as all its children
> >> return void.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >>  1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> >> index c9514dfd7d6d..93424f914159 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> >> @@ -4186,7 +4186,34 @@ static void spi_nor_manufacturer_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)
> >>  		nor->info->fixups->default_init(nor);
> >>  }
> >>  
> >> -static int spi_nor_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)
> >> +/**
> >> + * spi_nor_sfdp_init_params() - Initialize the flash's parameters and settings
> >> + * based on JESD216 SFDP standard.
> >> + * @nor:	pointer to a 'struct spi-nor'.
> >> + *
> >> + * The method has a roll-back mechanism: in case the SFDP parsing fails, the
> >> + * legacy flash parameters and settings will be restored.
> >> + */
> >> +static void spi_nor_sfdp_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)
> >> +{
> >> +	struct spi_nor_flash_parameter sfdp_params;
> >> +
> >> +	memcpy(&sfdp_params, &nor->params, sizeof(sfdp_params));
> >> +
> >> +	if (spi_nor_parse_sfdp(nor, &sfdp_params)) {
> >> +		nor->addr_width = 0;
> >> +		nor->flags &= ~SNOR_F_4B_OPCODES;
> >> +	} else {
> >> +		memcpy(&nor->params, &sfdp_params, sizeof(nor->params));
> >> +	}
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * spi_nor_legacy_init_params() - Initialize the flash's parameters and settings
> >> + * based on nor->info data.
> >> + * @nor:	pointer to a 'struct spi-nor'.
> >> + */
> >> +static void spi_nor_legacy_init_params(struct spi_nor *nor)  
> > 
> > Nitpick: hm, I'm not a big fan of the 'legacy' term here as I'm not sure
> > it reflects the reality. I guess this function will stay around, and
> > even new NORs are not guaranteed to provide SFDP tables. How about
> > spi_nor_set_default_params() or spi_nor_info_init_params()?  
> 
> I can rename it to spi_nor_info_init_params() to be in sync with
>                    spi_nor_manufacturer_init_params() and
>                    spi_nor_sfdp_init_params()
> 
> or I can rename all to:
> spi_nor_set_params()
> spi_nor_set_default_params()
> spi_nor_set_manufacturer_params()
> spi_nor_set_sfdp_params()
> 
> Both are ok, but the second option seems better. What would you choose?

Both sound good, pick the one you prefer.