linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] phy: qcom-qmp: Use register defines

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: <20191220042230.GD2536@vkoul-mobl>
Date:   Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:52:30 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     cang@...eaurora.org
Cc:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] phy: qcom-qmp: Use register defines

On 20-12-19, 08:44, cang@...eaurora.org wrote:
> On 2019-12-19 23:04, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > We already define register offsets so use them in register layout.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > index c2e800a3825a..06f971ca518e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-qmp.c
> > @@ -166,8 +166,8 @@ static const unsigned int
> > sdm845_ufsphy_regs_layout[] = {
> >  };
> > 
> >  static const unsigned int sm8150_ufsphy_regs_layout[] = {
> > -	[QPHY_START_CTRL]		= 0x00,
> > -	[QPHY_PCS_READY_STATUS]		= 0x180,
> > +	[QPHY_START_CTRL]		= QPHY_V4_PHY_START,
> > +	[QPHY_SW_RESET]			= QPHY_V4_SW_RESET,
> >  };
> > 
> >  static const struct qmp_phy_init_tbl msm8996_pcie_serdes_tbl[] = {
> 
> Why is the QPHY_PCS_READY_STATUS removed here? Then what "status" are we
> polling here for UFS PHY?
> 
> <snip>
>      if (cfg->type == PHY_TYPE_UFS) {
>          status = pcs + cfg->regs[QPHY_PCS_READY_STATUS];
>          mask = PCS_READY;
>          ready = PCS_READY;
>      } else {
> <snip>

Good catch Can, I dont think I intended it that way. Will fix it up!

Thanks
-- 
~Vinod