| 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: <CAMhs-H_e2U7nUav8h+Q0w-aZXvD6VM6wpg857WbFgw6x3z1ufA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jul 2021 14:05:11 +0200
From: Sergio Paracuellos <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
John Thomson <git@...nthomson.fastmail.com.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>,
René van Dorst <opensource@...rst.com>,
Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] gpio: mt7621: support gpio-line-names property
Hi Andy,
On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 1:32 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 2:06 PM Sergio Paracuellos
> <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 1:30 PM Sergio Paracuellos
> > <sergio.paracuellos@...il.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > - ret = devprop_gpiochip_set_names(gc);
> > + ret = devprop_gpiochip_set_names(gc, 0);
>
> I had been expecting that this parameter would be in the field of the gpiochip.
>
> ...
If doing it in that way is preferred, I have no problem at all. But in
that case I think there is no need for a new
'devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base' and we can assume for all drivers to
be zero and if is set taking it into account directly in
devprop_gpiochip_set_names function? Is this what you mean by having
this field added there??
>
> > The problem I see with this approach is that
> > 'devprop_gpiochip_set_names' already trusts in gpio_device already
> > created and this happens in 'gpiochip_add_data_with_key'. So doing in
> > this way force "broken drivers" to call this new
> > 'devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base' function after
> > 'devm_gpiochip_add_data' is called so the core code has already set up
> > the friendly names repeated for all gpio chip banks and the approach
> > would be to "overwrite" those in a second pass which sounds more like
> > a hack than a solution.
> >
> > But maybe I am missing something in what you were pointing out here.
>
> Would the above work?
The following works for me, but the overwritten part of the
'gdev->descs[i].name' because this has been already called once by the
core code is hacky and dirty, IMHO :)
diff --git a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
index 4a7e295c3640..ad145ab0794c 100644
--- a/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
+++ b/include/linux/gpio/driver.h
@@ -537,6 +537,8 @@ extern int gpiochip_add_data_with_key(struct
gpio_chip *gc, void *data,
devm_gpiochip_add_data_with_key(dev, gc, data, NULL, NULL)
#endif /* CONFIG_LOCKDEP */
+extern int devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base(struct gpio_chip *gc, int base);
+
static inline int gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *gc)
{
return gpiochip_add_data(gc, NULL);
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index 6e3c4d7a7d14..f9942d5d2f2a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -361,13 +361,14 @@ static int gpiochip_set_desc_names(struct gpio_chip *gc)
/*
* devprop_gpiochip_set_names - Set GPIO line names using device properties
* @chip: GPIO chip whose lines should be named, if possible
+ * @base: starting index in names array to start copying from
*
* Looks for device property "gpio-line-names" and if it exists assigns
* GPIO line names for the chip. The memory allocated for the assigned
* names belong to the underlying software node and should not be released
* by the caller.
*/
-static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct gpio_chip *chip)
+static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct gpio_chip *chip, int base)
{
struct gpio_device *gdev = chip->gpiodev;
struct device *dev = chip->parent;
@@ -383,12 +384,18 @@ static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct
gpio_chip *chip)
if (count < 0)
return 0;
- if (count > gdev->ngpio) {
+ if (count > gdev->ngpio && base == 0) {
dev_warn(&gdev->dev, "gpio-line-names is length %d but
should be at most length %d",
count, gdev->ngpio);
count = gdev->ngpio;
}
+ if (count <= base) {
+ for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
+ gdev->descs[i].name = "";
+ return 0;
+ }
+
names = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*names), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!names)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -401,14 +408,21 @@ static int devprop_gpiochip_set_names(struct
gpio_chip *chip)
return ret;
}
+ count = (base >= count) ? (base - count) : count;
for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
- gdev->descs[i].name = names[i];
+ gdev->descs[i].name = names[base + i];
kfree(names);
return 0;
}
+int devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base(struct gpio_chip *gc, int base)
+{
+ return devprop_gpiochip_set_names(gc, base);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base);
+
static unsigned long *gpiochip_allocate_mask(struct gpio_chip *gc)
{
unsigned long *p;
@@ -684,7 +698,7 @@ int gpiochip_add_data_with_key(struct gpio_chip
*gc, void *data,
if (gc->names)
ret = gpiochip_set_desc_names(gc);
else
- ret = devprop_gpiochip_set_names(gc);
+ ret = devprop_gpiochip_set_names(gc, 0);
if (ret)
goto err_remove_from_list;
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mt7621.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mt7621.c
index 82fb20dca53a..d4f19ab726b2 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-mt7621.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-mt7621.c
@@ -282,6 +282,12 @@ mediatek_gpio_bank_probe(struct device *dev,
return ret;
}
+ ret = devprop_gpiochip_set_names_base(&rg->chip, bank * MTK_BANK_WIDTH);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(dev, "Error setting line names for bank %d", bank);
+ return ret;
+ }
+
/* set polarity to low for all gpios */
mtk_gpio_w32(rg, GPIO_REG_POL, 0);
Best regards,
Sergio Paracuellos
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists