linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v5 13/14] media: tegra-video: Add CSI MIPI pads calibration

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: <ca18b93e-1f1c-50ae-e0c1-11758935ee89@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Jul 2020 03:43:27 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
        thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, frankc@...dia.com,
        hverkuil@...all.nl, sakari.ailus@....fi, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        helen.koike@...labora.com
Cc:     sboyd@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5 13/14] media: tegra-video: Add CSI MIPI pads
 calibration

30.07.2020 03:27, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
...
>>> Secondly, perhaps a failed calibration isn't a very critical error?
>>> Hence just printing a warning message should be enough.
>>
>> Using dev_err to report calibration failure. Are you suggesting to use
>> dev_warn instead of dev_err?

I meant that failing s_stream might be unnecessary.

The dev_warn should be more appropriate for a non-critical errors.

>>> Could you please make a patch that factors all ON/OFF code paths into a
>>> separate functions? It's a bit difficult to follow the combined code,
>>> especially partial changes in the patches. Thanks in advance!
>>
>> what do you mean by partial changes in patches?
>>
>> Can you please be more clear?
> 
> Also please specify what ON/OFF code paths you are referring to when you
> say to move into separate functions?

I meant to change all the code like this:

set(on) {
    if (on) {
       ...
       return;
    }

    if (!on)
      ...

    return;
}

to somewhat like this:

set(on) {
    if (on)
      ret = enable();
    else
      ret = disable();

    return ret;
}