| 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: <CAE+NS35bHQkiQroRGOWGNv_jbCiW6p4FfwJXNieEuN40YHdf_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 08:51:17 +0800
From: Gene Chen <gene.chen.richtek@...il.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>, benjamin.chao@...iatek.com,
shufan_lee@...htek.com, cy_huang@...htek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] mfd: mt6360: Merge different sub-devices i2c read/write
Gene Chen <gene.chen.richtek@...il.com> 於 2020年7月30日 週四 上午10:56寫道：
>
> Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> 於 2020年7月29日 週三 下午6:12寫道：
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Jul 2020, Gene Chen wrote:
> >
> > > Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> 於 2020年7月27日 週一 下午8:43寫道：
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 17 Jul 2020, Gene Chen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Remove unuse register definition.
> > > >
> > > > This should not be in here.
> > > >
> > > > > Merge different sub-devices i2c read/write function into one regmap,
> > > >
> > > > "I2C", "functions", "Regmap".
> > > >
> > >
> > > ACK
> > >
> > > > > because pmic and ldo part need crc bits for access protection.
> > > >
> > > > "PMIC", "LDO", "CRC".
> > > >
> > >
> > > ACK
> > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 1 +
> > > > > drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c | 229 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > > > include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h | 240 ---------------------------------------------
> > > > > 3 files changed, 204 insertions(+), 266 deletions(-)
> > > > > delete mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/mt6360.h
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > > > > index a37d7d1..0684ddc 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/Kconfig
> > > > > @@ -913,6 +913,7 @@ config MFD_MT6360
> > > > > select MFD_CORE
> > > > > select REGMAP_I2C
> > > > > select REGMAP_IRQ
> > > > > + select CRC8
> > > > > depends on I2C
> > > > > help
> > > > > Say Y here to enable MT6360 PMU/PMIC/LDO functional support.
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c b/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c
> > > > > index 3186a7c..97ef1ad 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/mfd/mt6360-core.c
> > > > > @@ -14,7 +14,46 @@
> > > > > #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> > > > > #include <linux/mfd/core.h>
> > > > >
> > > > > -#include <linux/mfd/mt6360.h>
> > > > > +enum {
> > > > > + MT6360_SLAVE_TCPC = 0,
> > > > > + MT6360_SLAVE_PMIC,
> > > > > + MT6360_SLAVE_LDO,
> > > > > + MT6360_SLAVE_PMU,
> > > > > + MT6360_SLAVE_MAX,
> > > > > +};
> > > > > +
> > > > > +struct mt6360_data {
> > > > > + struct i2c_client *i2c[MT6360_SLAVE_MAX];
> > > > > + struct device *dev;
> > > > > + struct regmap *regmap;
> > > > > + struct regmap_irq_chip_data *irq_data;
> > > > > + unsigned int chip_rev;mt6360_data
> > > > > + u8 crc8_tbl[CRC8_TABLE_SIZE];
> > > > > +};
> > > >
> > > > Make sure all of these entries are still used.
> > > >
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMU_SLAVEID 0x34
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMIC_SLAVEID 0x1A
> > > > > +#define MT6360_LDO_SLAVEID 0x64
> > > > > +#define MT6360_TCPC_SLAVEID 0x4E
> > > >
> > > > Can these be placed into ID order?
> > > >
> > >
> > > ACK
> > >
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_TCPCSTART 0x00
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_TCPCEND 0xFF
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_PMICSTART 0x100
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_PMICEND 0x13B
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_LDOSTART 0x200
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_LDOEND 0x21C
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_PMUSTART 0x300
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMU_DEV_INFO 0x300
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMU_CHG_IRQ1 0x3D0
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMU_CHG_MASK1 0x3F0
> > > > > +#define MT6360_REG_PMUEND 0x3FF
> > > > > +
> > > > > +/* from 0x3D0 to 0x3DF */
> > > >
> > > > We don't need this in here.
> > > >
> > >
> > > ACK
> > >
> > > > > +#define MT6360_PMU_IRQ_REGNUM 16
> > > > > +
> > > > > +#define CHIP_VEN_MASK 0xF0
> > > > > +#define CHIP_VEN_MT6360 0x50
> > > > > +#define CHIP_REV_MASK 0x0F
> > > > >
> > > > > /* reg 0 -> 0 ~ 7 */
> > > > > #define MT6360_CHG_TREG_EVT 4
> > > > > @@ -220,12 +259,6 @@ static const struct regmap_irq_chip mt6360_irq_chip = {
> > > > > .use_ack = true,
> > > > > };
> > > > >
> > > > > -static const struct regmap_config mt6360_pmu_regmap_config = {
> > > > > - .reg_bits = 8,
> > > > > - .val_bits = 8,
> > > > > - .max_register = MT6360_PMU_MAXREG,
> > > > > -};
> > > > > -
> > > > > static const struct resource mt6360_adc_resources[] = {
> > > > > DEFINE_RES_IRQ_NAMED(MT6360_ADC_DONEI, "adc_donei"),
> > > > > };
> > > > > @@ -310,11 +343,153 @@ static int mt6360_check_vendor_info(struct mt6360_data *data)
> > > > > return 0;
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > -static const unsigned short mt6360_slave_addr[MT6360_SLAVE_MAX] = {
> > > > > - MT6360_PMU_SLAVEID,
> > > > > +static const u16 mt6360_slave_addrs[MT6360_SLAVE_MAX] = {
> > > > > + MT6360_TCPC_SLAVEID,
> > > > > MT6360_PMIC_SLAVEID,
> > > > > MT6360_LDO_SLAVEID,
> > > > > - MT6360_TCPC_SLAVEID,
> > > > > + MT6360_PMU_SLAVEID,
> > > > > +};
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int mt6360_xlate_pmicldo_addr(u8 *addr, int rw_size)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + u8 flags[4] = { 0x00, 0x40, 0x80, 0xc0 };
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (rw_size < 1 || rw_size > 4)
> > > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + *addr &= 0x3f;
> > > > > + *addr |= flags[rw_size - 1];
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > >
> > > > You need some comments in here to explain what's going on.
> > > >
> > >
> > > ACK
> > >
> > > Is this comment readable?
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * When access sud-device PMIC and LDO part which only addressed
> > > 0x00~0x3F, read and write action need crc for protection.
> > >
> > > * Addr[5:0] is real access real register address.
> > > * Addr[7:6] use to store size, maximum 4 bytes.
> > >
> > > * When received the Addr, ic can interpret real register address and size to calculate or check crc
> > > * /
> >
> > Don't you think this reads better?
> >
> > No need for comments then:
> >
> > #define MT6360_ADDRESS_MASK 0x3f
> > #define MT6360_DATA_SIZE_1_BYTE 0x00
> > #define MT6360_DATA_SIZE_2_BYTES 0x40
> > #define MT6360_DATA_SIZE_3_BYTES 0x80
> > #define MT6360_DATA_SIZE_4_BYTES 0xC0
> >
> > static int mt6360_xlate_pmicldo_addr(u8 *addr, int rw_size)
> > {
> > /* Address is already in encoded [5:0] */
> > *addr &= MT6360_ADDRESS_MASK;
> >
> > /* Encode size [7:6] */
> > switch (rw_size) {
> > case 1:
> > *addr |= MT6360_DATA_SIZE_1_BYTE
> > break;
> > case 2:
> > *addr |= MT6360_DATA_SIZE_2_BYTES
> > break;
> > case 3:
> > *addr |= MT6360_DATA_SIZE_3_BYTES
> > break;
> > case 4:
> > *addr |= MT6360_DATA_SIZE_4_BYTES
> > break;
> > default:
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
>
> ACK. Thanks for your suggestions.
>
> > > /*
> > > * CRC calculation
> > > * total size is 2 byte and number of access bytes
> > > * 2 bytes include i2c device address, r/w bit and address which want to access
> > > * others for read or write data
> > > * /
> > >
> > > > > +static int mt6360_regmap_read(void *context, const void *reg, size_t reg_size,
> > > > > + void *val, size_t val_size)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct mt6360_data *data = context;
> > > > > + u8 bank = *(u8 *)reg, reg_addr = *(u8 *)(reg + 1);
> > > > > + struct i2c_client *i2c = data->i2c[bank];
> > > > > + bool crc_needed = false;
> > > > > + u8 *buf;
> > > > > + /* first two is i2c_addr + reg_addr , last is crc8 */
> > > > > + int alloc_size = 2 + val_size + 1, read_size = val_size;
> > > > > + u8 crc;
> > > > > + int ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (bank == MT6360_SLAVE_PMIC || bank == MT6360_SLAVE_LDO) {
> > > > > + crc_needed = true;
> > > > > + ret = mt6360_xlate_pmicldo_addr(®_addr, val_size);
> > > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + read_size += 1;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + buf = kzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > + if (!buf)
> > > > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* 7 bit slave addr + read bit */
> > > > > + buf[0] = ((i2c->addr & 0x7f) << 1) + 1;
> > > > > + buf[1] = reg_addr;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + ret = i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(i2c, reg_addr, read_size, buf + 2);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (ret == read_size) {
> > > > > + memcpy(val, buf + 2, val_size);
> > > > > + if (crc_needed) {
> > > > > + crc = crc8(data->crc8_tbl, buf, val_size + 2, 0);
> > > > > + if (crc != buf[val_size + 2])
> > > > > + ret = -EIO;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + kfree(buf);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + else if (ret != read_size)
> > > > > + return -EIO;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static int mt6360_regmap_write(void *context, const void *val, size_t val_size)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct mt6360_data *data = context;
> > > > > + u8 bank = *(u8 *)val, reg_addr = *(u8 *)(val + 1);
> > > > > + struct i2c_client *i2c = data->i2c[bank];
> > > > > + bool crc_needed = false;
> > > > > + u8 *buf;
> > > > > + /* first two is i2c_addr + reg_addr , last crc8 + dummy */
> > > > > + int alloc_size = 2 + val_size + 2, write_size = val_size - 2;
> > > > > + int ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (bank == MT6360_SLAVE_PMIC || bank == MT6360_SLAVE_LDO) {
> > > > > + crc_needed = true;
> > > > > + ret = mt6360_xlate_pmicldo_addr(®_addr, val_size - 2);
> > > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + buf = kzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > + if (!buf)
> > > > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* 7 bit slave addr + write bit */
> > > > > + buf[0] = ((i2c->addr & 0x7f) << 1);
> > > > > + buf[1] = reg_addr;
> > > > > + /* val need to minus regaddr 16bit */
> > > > > + memcpy(buf + 2, val + 2, write_size);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (crc_needed) {
> > > > > + buf[val_size] = crc8(data->crc8_tbl, buf, val_size, 0);
> > > > > + write_size += 2;
> > > > > + }
> > > > > +
> > > > > + ret = i2c_smbus_write_i2c_block_data(i2c,
> > > > > + reg_addr, write_size, buf + 2);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + kfree(buf);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (ret < 0)
> > > > > + return ret;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + return 0;
> > > > > +}
> > > > > +
> > > > > +static const struct regmap_bus mt6360_regmap_bus = {
> > > > > + .read = mt6360_regmap_read,
> > > > > + .write = mt6360_regmap_write,
> > > > > +
> > > > > + /* due to pmic and ldo crc access size limit */
> > > > > + .max_raw_read = 4,
> > > > > + .max_raw_write = 4,
> > > > > +};
> > > >
> > > > Why isn't all of the above in a Regmap driver?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Do you means split out like drivers/base/regmap/regmap-ac97.c?
> >
> > Yes, I do.
> >
> > [...]
> >
>
> ACK
>
After I implement first version of regmap-mt6360.c, I found out ac97
is a intel standard codec.
If device follow this spec, it can reuse this api.
But regmap-mt6360.c may single use only.
should I try sending patch once to regmap reviewer?
> > > > > + i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
> > > >
> > > > Where is this used?
> > >
> > > I can use device to get chip_rev from dev_get_drvdata.
> > > According to different chip_rev, I may need apply different way to do.
> > >
> > > > Didn't you just move the definition into this file?
> > >
> > > ACK, I will seperate move definition into this file to new patch
> >
> > That's not the point I'm making.
> >
> > You can't use 'data' outside of this file, so why are you setting it
> > inside the clientdata area?
> >
>
> I see. It's my logical defect
> I will remove set clientdata.
>
> > --
> > Lee Jones [李琼斯]
> > Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
> > Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
> > Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists