linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 08/22] mtd: spi-nor: Rework write

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, 10 Oct 2019 09:21:17 +0200
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
To:     <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
Cc:     <vigneshr@...com>, <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
        <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        <jonas@...rbonn.se>, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        andrew@...id.au, richard@....at, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        vz@...ia.com, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, joel@....id.au,
        miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
        computersforpeace@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/22] mtd: spi-nor: Rework write_enable/disable()

On Tue, 24 Sep 2019 07:46:18 +0000
<Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:

> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> 
> static int write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor)
> static int write_disable(struct spi_nor *nor)
> become
> static int spi_nor_write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor)
> static int spi_nor_write_disable(struct spi_nor *nor)
> 
> Check for errors after each call to them. Move them up in the
> file as the first SPI NOR Register Operations, to avoid further
> forward declarations.

Same here, split that in 3 patches please.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 175 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 120 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> index 0fb124bd2e77..0aee068a5835 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
> @@ -389,6 +389,64 @@ static ssize_t spi_nor_write_data(struct spi_nor *nor, loff_t to, size_t len,
>  }
>  
>  /**
> + * spi_nor_write_enable() - Set write enable latch with Write Enable command.
> + * @nor:        pointer to 'struct spi_nor'
> + *
> + * Return: 0 on success, -errno otherwise.
> + */
> +static int spi_nor_write_enable(struct spi_nor *nor)
> +{
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	if (nor->spimem) {
> +		struct spi_mem_op op =
> +			SPI_MEM_OP(SPI_MEM_OP_CMD(SPINOR_OP_WREN, 1),
> +				   SPI_MEM_OP_NO_ADDR,
> +				   SPI_MEM_OP_NO_DUMMY,
> +				   SPI_MEM_OP_NO_DATA);
> +
> +		ret = spi_mem_exec_op(nor->spimem, &op);
> +	} else {
> +		ret = nor->controller_ops->write_reg(nor, SPINOR_OP_WREN,
> +						     NULL, 0);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (ret)
> +		dev_err(nor->dev, "error %d on Write Enable\n", ret);

Do we really need these error messages? I mean, if there's an error it
should be propagated to the upper layer, so maybe we should use
dev_dbg() here.

> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +