linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] pinctrl: qcom: spmi-gpio: correct parent irqspec translation

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: <163069256450.405991.2176328404036039930@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 03 Sep 2021 11:09:24 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        satya priya <skakit@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>, kgunda@...eaurora.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        satya priya <skakit@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] pinctrl: qcom: spmi-gpio: correct parent irqspec translation

Quoting satya priya (2021-09-02 02:15:05)
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-spmi-gpio.c b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-spmi-gpio.c
> index 98bf0e2..dbae168 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-spmi-gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-spmi-gpio.c
> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
>  // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
>  /*
> - * Copyright (c) 2012-2014, The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
> + * Copyright (c) 2012-2014, 2016-2021 The Linux Foundation. All rights reserved.
>   */
>  
>  #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>  #include <linux/platform_device.h>
>  #include <linux/regmap.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/spmi.h>
>  #include <linux/types.h>
>  
>  #include <dt-bindings/pinctrl/qcom,pmic-gpio.h>
> @@ -171,6 +172,8 @@ struct pmic_gpio_state {
>         struct pinctrl_dev *ctrl;
>         struct gpio_chip chip;
>         struct irq_chip irq;
> +       u8 usid;
> +       u8 pid_base;
>  };
>  
>  static const struct pinconf_generic_params pmic_gpio_bindings[] = {
> @@ -949,12 +952,36 @@ static int pmic_gpio_child_to_parent_hwirq(struct gpio_chip *chip,
>                                            unsigned int *parent_hwirq,
>                                            unsigned int *parent_type)
>  {
> -       *parent_hwirq = child_hwirq + 0xc0;
> +       struct pmic_gpio_state *state = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +
> +       *parent_hwirq = child_hwirq + state->pid_base;
>         *parent_type = child_type;
>  
>         return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static void *pmic_gpio_populate_parent_fwspec(struct gpio_chip *chip,
> +                                            unsigned int parent_hwirq,
> +                                            unsigned int parent_type)
> +{
> +       struct pmic_gpio_state *state = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
> +       struct irq_fwspec *fwspec;
> +
> +       fwspec = kzalloc(sizeof(*fwspec), GFP_KERNEL);

The implementation of gpiochip_populate_parent_fwspec_fourcell() uses
kmalloc() here. Should we also do that? Presumably the fwspec will be
set with the important parts so this will save a memset call.

> +       if (!fwspec)
> +               return NULL;
> +
> +       fwspec->fwnode = chip->irq.parent_domain->fwnode;
> +
> +       fwspec->param_count = 4;
> +       fwspec->param[0] = state->usid;
> +       fwspec->param[1] = parent_hwirq;
> +       fwspec->param[2] = 0;

If the kzalloc stays, this can be dropped.

> +       fwspec->param[3] = parent_type;
> +
> +       return fwspec;
> +}
> +
>  static int pmic_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>         struct irq_domain *parent_domain;