linux-kernel - RE: [RESEND v5 2/2] phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC PHY support

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <BN8PR11MB37143C5A4C98BF28C521B838DD980@BN8PR11MB3714.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 03:17:11 +0000
From:   "Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie" 
        <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@...el.com>
To:     "Shevchenko, Andriy" <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
CC:     "kishon@...com" <kishon@...com>,
        "vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [RESEND v5 2/2] phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC PHY support



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shevchenko, Andriy <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 10:01 PM
> To: Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie
> <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@...el.com>
> Cc: kishon@...com; vkoul@...nel.org; robh+dt@...nel.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; devicetree@...r.kernel.org; Hunter, Adrian
> <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
> Subject: Re: [RESEND v5 2/2] phy: intel: Add Keem Bay eMMC PHY support
> 
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 07:32:52AM +0800, Wan Ahmad Zainie wrote:
> > Add support for eMMC PHY on Intel Keem Bay SoC.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +	ret = regmap_read_poll_timeout(priv->syscfg, PHY_STAT,
> > +				       dllrdy, IS_DLLRDY(dllrdy),
> > +				       0, 50 * USEC_PER_MSEC);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(&phy->dev, "dllrdy failed, ret=%d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> 
> This has no changes.
> 
> Are you sure the version is correct?

Ah. Sorry Andy. I misunderstood your earlier review comment.
You mean return inside the last if(...) should be discarded.

Kishon, should I send another version, or is it acceptable?

> 
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>