linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] phy: qcom-snps: Add runtime suspend and resume handlers

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: <20200427165919.GR56386@vkoul-mobl.Dlink>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 22:29:19 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
To:     Wesley Cheng <wcheng@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, kishon@...com,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: qcom-snps: Add runtime suspend and resume handlers

On 23-04-20, 10:26, Wesley Cheng wrote:

> +static int qcom_snps_hsphy_suspend(struct qcom_snps_hsphy *hsphy)
> +{
> +	if (hsphy->suspended)
> +		return 0;
> +
> +	dev_dbg(&hsphy->phy->dev, "Suspend QCOM SNPS PHY, mode = %d \n", hsphy->mode);
> +
> +	if (hsphy->mode == PHY_MODE_USB_HOST) {
> +		/* Enable auto-resume to meet remote wakeup timing */
> +		qcom_snps_hsphy_write_mask(hsphy->base, USB2_PHY_USB_PHY_HS_PHY_CTRL2,
> +										USB2_AUTO_RESUME, USB2_AUTO_RESUME);
> +		usleep_range(500, 1000);
> +		qcom_snps_hsphy_write_mask(hsphy->base, USB2_PHY_USB_PHY_HS_PHY_CTRL2,
> +										0, USB2_AUTO_RESUME);

Kernel has a coding guideline where we try to "stick" to 80 char limit
and is sometimes okay like debug logs. Above is not okay. Please fix it
and run ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict on your patch and fix all
errors. Warning and checks at your discretion using common sense. When
in doubt do ask :)

> +	}
> +
> +	clk_disable_unprepare(hsphy->cfg_ahb_clk);
> +	hsphy->suspended = true;

why do you need to track this?

> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int qcom_snps_hsphy_resume(struct qcom_snps_hsphy *hsphy)
> +{
> +	int ret = 0;

superfluous init..

>  static int qcom_snps_hsphy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>  	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> @@ -251,6 +333,14 @@ static int qcom_snps_hsphy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> +	pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> +	pm_runtime_enable(dev);

would it not make sense to enable this after pjy in initialized?

-- 
~Vinod