linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci: Update firmware interface API

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: <be00e2df-572b-2bdb-85c2-675ca16e5d01@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:51:33 +0200
From:   Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
Cc:     "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci: Update firmware interface API

On 24/11/20 4:25 pm, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 at 00:39, Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com> wrote:
>>
>> The device_* calls were added a few years ago to abstract
>> DT/ACPI/fwnode firmware interfaces. Lets convert the two
>> sdhci caps fields to use the generic calls rather than the OF
>> specific ones. This has the side effect of allowing
>> ACPI based devices to quirk themselves when the caps field
>> is broken.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@....com>
> 
> Applied for next, thanks!
> 
> Kind regards
> Uffe
> 
> 
>> ---
>>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 8 ++++----
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> index 592a55a34b58..feba64fbde16 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> @@ -3992,10 +3992,10 @@ void __sdhci_read_caps(struct sdhci_host *host, const u16 *ver,
>>         if (host->v4_mode)
>>                 sdhci_do_enable_v4_mode(host);
>>
>> -       of_property_read_u64(mmc_dev(host->mmc)->of_node,
>> -                            "sdhci-caps-mask", &dt_caps_mask);
>> -       of_property_read_u64(mmc_dev(host->mmc)->of_node,
>> -                            "sdhci-caps", &dt_caps);
>> +       device_property_read_u64_array(mmc_dev(host->mmc),
>> +                                      "sdhci-caps-mask", &dt_caps_mask, 1);
>> +       device_property_read_u64_array(mmc_dev(host->mmc),
>> +                                      "sdhci-caps", &dt_caps, 1);

But why not use device_property_read_u64()?

>>
>>         v = ver ? *ver : sdhci_readw(host, SDHCI_HOST_VERSION);
>>         host->version = (v & SDHCI_SPEC_VER_MASK) >> SDHCI_SPEC_VER_SHIFT;
>> --
>> 2.26.2
>>