linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 10/32] mtd: spi-nor: Pointer parameter for CR in spi_nor_read

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]

Message-ID: <f203cc52-7082-5e89-e6de-9bf44dafebb3@microchip.com>
Date:   Thu, 31 Oct 2019 14:26:17 +0000
From:   <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
To:     <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
CC:     <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>, <vigneshr@...com>,
        <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/32] mtd: spi-nor: Pointer parameter for CR in
 spi_nor_read_cr()



On 10/31/2019 12:58 PM, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> External E-Mail
> 
> 
> On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 11:17:04 +0000
> <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com> wrote:
> 
>> From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
>>
>> Let the callers pass the pointer to the DMA-able buffer where
>> the value of the Configuration Register will be written. This way we
>> avoid the casts between int and u8, which can be confusing.
>>
>> Callers stop compare the return value of spi_nor_read_cr() with negative,
>> spi_nor_read_cr() returns 0 on success and -errno otherwise.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
> 
> There's just this &nor->bouncebuf[0] that I'd prefer to be turned into
> nor->bouncebuf if you're okay.
> 

I used &nor->bouncebuf[0] and not nor->bouncebuf for consistency reasons, but
sure I can update this. When writing the Status Register with two bytes, it
happens that in the code I pass pointer to the second byte, so &nor->bouncebuf[1].

I'm ok with both ways, and since you signaled it, I'll change according to your
suggestion.

Thanks for reviewing the series!