| 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: <20200418185853.35b07a7d@archlinux>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 18:58:53 +0100
From: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To: ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com
Cc: Eugen Hristev - M18282 <Eugen.Hristev@...rochip.com>,
Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iio: at91-sama5d2_adc: split
at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch() helper
On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 08:43:52 +0200
ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 12:22:45PM +0000, Eugen Hristev - M18282 wrote:
> > On 13.04.2020 20:05, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Mar 2020 10:42:18 +0200
> > > Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> This change moves the logic to check if the current channel is the
> > >> touchscreen channel to a separate helper.
> > >> This reduces some code duplication, but the main intent is to re-use this
> > >> in the next patches.
> > >>
> > >> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Ardelean <alexandru.ardelean@...log.com>
> > > Eugen / Ludovic,
> > >
> > > Have you had a chance to look at this series?
> >
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > Does the patch apply correctly for you ?
>
> No issue on my side to apply them (v5.7-rc1 and next).
>
> > I will try to test it , if I manage to apply it.
> > I can only test the ADC though because at this moment I do not have a
> > touchscreen at disposal.
>
> Same here, not able to test the touchscreen but it doesn't seem very risky.
>
> >
> > Meanwhile, the code looks good for me,
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Eugen Hristev <eugen.hristev@...rochip.com>
>
> You can add mine as well:
>
> Reviewed-by: Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com>
For both of you - tags for both patches or just this one?
Thanks,
Jonathan
>
> Regards
>
> Ludovic
>
> >
> > By the way, I do not know if my two pending patches on this driver will
> > conflict or not.
> >
> > Eugen
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jonathan
> > >
> > >> ---
> > >>
> > >> This patchset continues discussion:
> > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/20191023082508.17583-1-alexandru.ardelean@analog.com/
> > >> Apologies for the delay.
> > >>
> > >> Changelog v1 -> v2:
> > >> * added patch 'iio: at91-sama5d2_adc: split at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch()
> > >> helper'
> > >> * renamed at91_adc_buffer_postenable() -> at91_adc_buffer_preenable()
> > >> - at91_adc_buffer_postenable() - now just calls
> > >> iio_triggered_buffer_postenable() if the channel isn't the touchscreen
> > >> channel
> > >> * renamed at91_adc_buffer_predisable() -> at91_adc_buffer_postdisable()
> > >> - at91_adc_buffer_predisable() - now just calls
> > >> iio_triggered_buffer_predisable() if the channel isn't the touchscreen
> > >> channel
> > >>
> > >> drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c | 31 +++++++++++++++---------------
> > >> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > >>
> > >> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> > >> index a5c7771227d5..f2a74c47c768 100644
> > >> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> > >> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/at91-sama5d2_adc.c
> > >> @@ -873,18 +873,24 @@ static int at91_adc_dma_start(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > >> return 0;
> > >> }
> > >>
> > >> +static bool at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > >> +{
> > >> + struct at91_adc_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > >> +
> > >> + return !!bitmap_subset(indio_dev->active_scan_mask,
> > >> + &st->touch_st.channels_bitmask,
> > >> + AT91_SAMA5D2_MAX_CHAN_IDX + 1);
> > >> +}
> > >> +
> > >> static int at91_adc_buffer_postenable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > >> {
> > >> int ret;
> > >> struct at91_adc_state *st = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> > >>
> > >> /* check if we are enabling triggered buffer or the touchscreen */
> > >> - if (bitmap_subset(indio_dev->active_scan_mask,
> > >> - &st->touch_st.channels_bitmask,
> > >> - AT91_SAMA5D2_MAX_CHAN_IDX + 1)) {
> > >> - /* touchscreen enabling */
> > >> + if (at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch(indio_dev))
> > >> return at91_adc_configure_touch(st, true);
> > >> - }
> > >> +
> > >> /* if we are not in triggered mode, we cannot enable the buffer. */
> > >> if (!(indio_dev->currentmode & INDIO_ALL_TRIGGERED_MODES))
> > >> return -EINVAL;
> > >> @@ -906,12 +912,9 @@ static int at91_adc_buffer_predisable(struct iio_dev *indio_dev)
> > >> u8 bit;
> > >>
> > >> /* check if we are disabling triggered buffer or the touchscreen */
> > >> - if (bitmap_subset(indio_dev->active_scan_mask,
> > >> - &st->touch_st.channels_bitmask,
> > >> - AT91_SAMA5D2_MAX_CHAN_IDX + 1)) {
> > >> - /* touchscreen disable */
> > >> + if (at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch(indio_dev))
> > >> return at91_adc_configure_touch(st, false);
> > >> - }
> > >> +
> > >> /* if we are not in triggered mode, nothing to do here */
> > >> if (!(indio_dev->currentmode & INDIO_ALL_TRIGGERED_MODES))
> > >> return -EINVAL;
> > >> @@ -1886,14 +1889,10 @@ static __maybe_unused int at91_adc_resume(struct device *dev)
> > >> return 0;
> > >>
> > >> /* check if we are enabling triggered buffer or the touchscreen */
> > >> - if (bitmap_subset(indio_dev->active_scan_mask,
> > >> - &st->touch_st.channels_bitmask,
> > >> - AT91_SAMA5D2_MAX_CHAN_IDX + 1)) {
> > >> - /* touchscreen enabling */
> > >> + if (at91_adc_current_chan_is_touch(indio_dev))
> > >> return at91_adc_configure_touch(st, true);
> > >> - } else {
> > >> + else
> > >> return at91_adc_configure_trigger(st->trig, true);
> > >> - }
> > >>
> > >> /* not needed but more explicit */
> > >> return 0;
> > >
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists