linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 27/38] mfd: intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc: Convert to use new SCU IPC API

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: <20200122134621.GF4963@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 22 Jan 2020 14:46:21 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        Zha Qipeng <qipeng.zha@...el.com>,
        "David E . Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 27/38] mfd: intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc: Convert to use new
 SCU IPC API

On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 07:01:03PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> Convert the Intel Broxton Whiskey Cover PMIC driver to use the new SCU
> IPC API. This allows us to get rid of the PMC IPC implementation which
> is now covered in SCU IPC driver.
> 
> Also move PMIC specific IPC message constants to the PMIC driver from
> the intel_pmc_ipc.h header.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h |  3 ---
>  drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.c   | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h
> index e6da1ce26256..b438a488f613 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h
> @@ -3,9 +3,6 @@
>  #define  _ASM_X86_INTEL_PMC_IPC_H_
>  
>  /* Commands */
> -#define PMC_IPC_PMIC_ACCESS		0xFF
> -#define		PMC_IPC_PMIC_ACCESS_READ	0x0
> -#define		PMC_IPC_PMIC_ACCESS_WRITE	0x1
>  #define PMC_IPC_USB_PWR_CTRL		0xF0
>  #define PMC_IPC_PMIC_BLACKLIST_SEL	0xEF
>  #define PMC_IPC_PHY_CONFIG		0xEE
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.c b/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.c
> index 739cfb5b69fe..60aba2a1561c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.c
> @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@
>  #include <linux/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_bxtwc.h>
>  #include <linux/module.h>
>  
> -#include <asm/intel_pmc_ipc.h>
> +#include <asm/intel_scu_ipc.h>
>  
>  /* PMIC device registers */
>  #define REG_ADDR_MASK		0xFF00
> @@ -58,6 +58,10 @@
>  /* Whiskey Cove PMIC share same ACPI ID between different platforms */
>  #define BROXTON_PMIC_WC_HRV	4
>  
> +#define PMC_PMIC_ACCESS		0xFF
> +#define PMC_PMIC_READ		0x0
> +#define PMC_PMIC_WRITE		0x1
> +
>  enum bxtwc_irqs {
>  	BXTWC_PWRBTN_LVL1_IRQ = 0,
>  	BXTWC_TMU_LVL1_IRQ,
> @@ -288,9 +292,9 @@ static int regmap_ipc_byte_reg_read(void *context, unsigned int reg,
>  
>  	ipc_in[0] = reg;
>  	ipc_in[1] = i2c_addr;
> -	ret = intel_pmc_ipc_command(PMC_IPC_PMIC_ACCESS,
> -			PMC_IPC_PMIC_ACCESS_READ,
> -			ipc_in, sizeof(ipc_in), (u32 *)ipc_out, 1);
> +	ret = intel_scu_ipc_dev_command(pmic->scu, PMC_PMIC_ACCESS,
> +					PMC_PMIC_READ, ipc_in, sizeof(ipc_in),
> +					ipc_out, sizeof(ipc_out));
>  	if (ret) {
>  		dev_err(pmic->dev, "Failed to read from PMIC\n");

Meta-comment, the call should be the thing making that error message,
do not force all callers to log it again, or in some other way.  That
just makes for a larger mess.

thanks,

greg k-h