linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 09/12] PCI/switchtec: Add gen4 support in struct flash_info

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: <02513858-4832-b971-138e-8ecc1c7730b8@deltatee.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 14:34:49 -0700
From:   Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Kelvin.Cao@...rochip.com, Eric Pilmore <epilmore@...aio.com>,
        Doug Meyer <dmeyer@...aio.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] PCI/switchtec: Add gen4 support in struct
 flash_info_regs



On 2020-01-08 2:23 p.m., Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 06, 2020 at 12:03:34PM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
>> From: Kelvin Cao <kelvin.cao@...rochip.com>
>>
>> Add a union with gen3 and gen4 flash_info structs.
> 
> This does a lot more than add a union :)
> 
> I think this looks reasonable, but I would like it even better if this
> and related patches could be split up a little bit differently:
> 
>   - Rename SWITCHTEC_CFG0_RUNNING to SWITCHTEC_GEN3_CFG0_RUNNING, etc
>     (purely mechanical change, so trivial and obvious).
> 
>   - Add switchtec_gen and the tests where it's needed, but with only
>     SWITCHTEC_GEN3 cases for now.
> 
>   - Refactor ioctl_flash_part_info() (still only supports GEN3).
>     Maybe adds struct flash_info_regs and union, but only with gen3.
> 
>   - Add GEN4 support (patch basically contains only GEN4-related
>     things and doesn't touch GEN3 things at all).  Maybe it would
>     still make sense to split the GEN4 support into multiple patches
>     (as in this series), or maybe they could be squashed into a single
>     GEN4 patch?
> 
>   - It seems like at least the aliasing quirk and the driver device ID
>     update could/should be squashed since they contain the same
>     constants.

Thanks for the review. Yes, I should be able to clean this up and submit
a v2 in the next week or two.

Logan