| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4acd4bcf-4488-01f2-cacc-0170c33e20c2@castello.eng.br>
Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2019 15:12:44 -0300
From: Matheus Castello <matheus@...tello.eng.br>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: sre@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
cw00.choi@...sung.com, b.zolnierkie@...sung.com,
lee.jones@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] power: supply: max17040: Config alert SOC low
level threshold from FDT
Em 11/1/19 1:52 PM, Matheus Castello escreveu:
>
>
> Em 11/1/19 12:27 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski escreveu:
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 03:41:33PM -0300, Matheus Castello wrote:
>>> For configuration of fuel gauge alert for a low level state of charge
>>> interrupt we add a function to config level threshold and a device tree
>>> binding property to set it in flatned device tree node.
>>>
>>> Now we can use "maxim,alert-low-soc-level" property with the values from
>>> 1% up to 32% to configure alert interrupt threshold.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matheus Castello <matheus@...tello.eng.br>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/power/supply/max17040_battery.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/max17040_battery.c
>>> b/drivers/power/supply/max17040_battery.c
>>> index 75459f76d02c..802575342c72 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/power/supply/max17040_battery.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/max17040_battery.c
>>> @@ -29,6 +29,9 @@
>>> #define MAX17040_DELAY 1000
>>> #define MAX17040_BATTERY_FULL 95
>>>
>>> +#define MAX17040_ATHD_MASK 0xFFC0
>>> +#define MAX17040_ATHD_DEFAULT_POWER_UP 4
>>> +
>>> struct max17040_chip {
>>> struct i2c_client *client;
>>> struct delayed_work work;
>>> @@ -43,6 +46,8 @@ struct max17040_chip {
>>> int soc;
>>> /* State Of Charge */
>>> int status;
>>> + /* Low alert threshold from 32% to 1% of the State of Charge */
>>> + u32 low_soc_alert_threshold;
>>> };
>>>
>>> static int max17040_get_property(struct power_supply *psy,
>>> @@ -99,6 +104,22 @@ static void max17040_reset(struct i2c_client
>>> *client)
>>> max17040_write_reg(client, MAX17040_CMD, 0x0054);
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int max17040_set_low_soc_threshold_alert(struct i2c_client
>>> *client,
>>> + u32 level)
>>> +{
>>> + int ret;
>>> + u16 data;
>>> +
>>> + level = 32 - level;
>>> + data = max17040_read_reg(client, MAX17040_RCOMP);
>>> + /* clear the alrt bit and set LSb 5 bits */
>>> + data &= MAX17040_ATHD_MASK;
>>> + data |= level;
>>> + ret = max17040_write_reg(client, MAX17040_RCOMP, data);
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static void max17040_get_vcell(struct i2c_client *client)
>>> {
>>> struct max17040_chip *chip = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
>>> @@ -115,7 +136,6 @@ static void max17040_get_soc(struct i2c_client
>>> *client)
>>> u16 soc;
>>>
>>> soc = max17040_read_reg(client, MAX17040_SOC);
>>> -
>>> chip->soc = (soc >> 8);
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -161,6 +181,24 @@ static void max17040_get_status(struct
>>> i2c_client *client)
>>> chip->status = POWER_SUPPLY_STATUS_FULL;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static int max17040_get_of_data(struct max17040_chip *chip)
>>> +{
>>> + struct device *dev = &chip->client->dev;
>>> + struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
>>> + int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> + if (of_property_read_u32(np, "maxim,alert-low-soc-level",
>>> + &chip->low_soc_alert_threshold)) {
>>
>> Please align the line break with line above. checkpatch --strict might
>> give you hints about this.
>> >> + chip->low_soc_alert_threshold =
>> MAX17040_ATHD_DEFAULT_POWER_UP;
>>> + /* check if low_soc_alert_threshold is between 1% and 32% */
>>
>> The comment looks misleading here, like it belongs to previous block.
>> Maybe put it inside else if {} block?
>>
>>> + } else if (chip->low_soc_alert_threshold <= 0 ||
>>> + chip->low_soc_alert_threshold >= 33){
>>
>> Missing space before {.
>>
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static void max17040_check_changes(struct i2c_client *client)
>>> {
>>> max17040_get_vcell(client);
>>> @@ -192,6 +230,10 @@ static irqreturn_t max17040_thread_handler(int
>>> id, void *dev)
>>> /* send uevent */
>>> power_supply_changed(chip->battery);
>>>
>>> + /* reset alert bit */
>>> + max17040_set_low_soc_threshold_alert(client,
>>> + chip->low_soc_alert_threshold);
>>
>> Unless the continuation exceeds 80 character limit, please align it with
>> previous line.
>>
>>> +
>>> return IRQ_HANDLED;
>>> }
>>>
>>> @@ -216,6 +258,7 @@ static int max17040_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>> struct i2c_adapter *adapter = client->adapter;
>>> struct power_supply_config psy_cfg = {};
>>> struct max17040_chip *chip;
>>> + int ret;
>>>
>>> if (!i2c_check_functionality(adapter, I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_BYTE))
>>> return -EIO;
>>> @@ -226,6 +269,12 @@ static int max17040_probe(struct i2c_client
>>> *client,
>>>
>>> chip->client = client;
>>> chip->pdata = client->dev.platform_data;
>>> + ret = max17040_get_of_data(chip);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + dev_err(&client->dev,
>>> + "failed: low SOC alert OF data out of bounds\n");
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>>
>>> i2c_set_clientdata(client, chip);
>>> psy_cfg.drv_data = chip;
>>> @@ -242,20 +291,31 @@ static int max17040_probe(struct i2c_client
>>> *client,
>>>
>>> /* check interrupt */
>>> if (client->irq) {
>>> - int ret;
>>> - unsigned int flags;
>>> -
>>> - dev_info(&client->dev, "IRQ: enabled\n");
>>> - flags = IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING | IRQF_ONESHOT;
>>> - ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev, client->irq,
>>> NULL,
>>> - max17040_thread_handler, flags,
>>> - chip->battery->desc->name,
>>> - chip);
>>> -
>>> - if (ret) {
>>> - client->irq = 0;
>>> + if (of_device_is_compatible(client->dev.of_node,
>>> + "maxim,max77836-battery")) {
>>
>> Alignment.
>>
>>> + ret = max17040_set_low_soc_threshold_alert(client,
>>> + chip->low_soc_alert_threshold);
>>
>> Ditto.
>>
I am working to fix the alignments issues using the checkpath strict and
I have a doubt. Here for example if I fix the check "Alignment should
match open parenthesis" it will pass the 80 characters limit and will
show me a warning.
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + dev_err(&client->dev,
>>> + "Failed to set low SOC alert: err %d\n",
>>> + ret);
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + dev_info(&client->dev, "IRQ: enabled\n");
>>> + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&client->dev,
>>> + client->irq, NULL, max17040_thread_handler,
>>> + (client->flags | IRQF_ONESHOT),
>>
>> This looks unrelated. Befor ethis were IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING |
>> IRQF_ONESHOT, now you use client->flags. There is no reason why this
>> commit should change >
>
> I am using client->flags here to not overwrite the flag passed in device
> tree. Let me know what you think about it: if I should leave it as in
> the previous commit, or should I modify the previous commit too.
>
>>> + chip->battery->desc->name, chip);
>>
>> This breaks alignment which was here before.
>>
The same here.
How to proceed in this case?
Best Regards,
Matheus Castello
>> Best regards,
>> Krzysztof
>>
>>
>
> Thanks for the review i will work on it.
>
>>> +
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + client->irq = 0;
>>> + dev_warn(&client->dev,
>>> + "Failed to get IRQ err %d\n", ret);
>>> + }
>>> + } else {
>>> dev_warn(&client->dev,
>>> - "Failed to get IRQ err %d\n", ret);
>>> + "Device not compatible for IRQ");
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> --
>>> 2.24.0.rc2
>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists