linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] nvmem: eeprom: at25: add support for FRAM

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: <cc57eb8a-bfd6-f314-b408-0c4c8fe01a03@aksignal.cz>
Date:   Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:57:04 +0200
From:   Jiří Prchal <jiri.prchal@...ignal.cz>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Christian Eggers <ceggers@...i.de>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/5] nvmem: eeprom: at25: add support for FRAM



On 08. 06. 21 11:07, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> +	int has_sernum;
> 
> bool?

OK.
> 
>> +	spi_message_init(&m);
>> +	memset(t, 0, sizeof(t));
> 
> Are you allowed to send spi messages off of the stack?

I don't know, but it's functional. Copied from read function.
> 
> 
>> -	dev_info(&spi->dev, "%d %s %s eeprom%s, pagesize %u\n",
>> -		(chip.byte_len < 1024) ? chip.byte_len : (chip.byte_len / 1024),
>> -		(chip.byte_len < 1024) ? "Byte" : "KByte",
>> -		at25->chip.name,
>> -		(chip.flags & EE_READONLY) ? " (readonly)" : "",
>> -		at25->chip.page_size);
>> +	dev_info(&spi->dev, "%d %s %s %s%s, pagesize %u\n",
>> +		 (chip.byte_len < 1024) ? chip.byte_len : (chip.byte_len / 1024),
>> +		 (chip.byte_len < 1024) ? "Byte" : "KByte",
>> +		 at25->chip.name, is_fram ? "fram" : "eeprom",
>> +		 (chip.flags & EE_READONLY) ? " (readonly)" : "",
>> +		 at25->chip.page_size);
> 
> When drivers work properly, they should be quiet.  This whole dev_info()
> should be removed in a later patch.

OK, didn't know, originally there is such info output. And keeping 
simplest smallest patch changes.