| 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: <VI1PR04MB58535180BEE89EF4584BEF3F8CD49@VI1PR04MB5853.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:02:26 +0000
From: Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@....com>
To: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
"bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"lorenzo.pieralisi@....com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
CC: "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: imx: encapsulate the clock enable into one
standalone function
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2021 4:48 PM
> To: Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@....com>; bhelgaas@...gle.com;
> lorenzo.pieralisi@....com
> Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>;
> linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> kernel@...gutronix.de
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI: imx: encapsulate the clock enable into one
> standalone function
>
> Am Mittwoch, dem 08.09.2021 um 14:59 +0800 schrieb Richard Zhu:
> > No function changes, just encapsulate the i.MX PCIe clocks enable
> > operations into one standalone function
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Richard Zhu <hongxing.zhu@....com>
> > ---
> > drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c | 82
> > +++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c
> > b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c
> > index 80fc98acf097..0264432e4c4a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-imx6.c
> > @@ -143,6 +143,8 @@ struct imx6_pcie {
> > #define PHY_RX_OVRD_IN_LO_RX_DATA_EN BIT(5)
> > #define PHY_RX_OVRD_IN_LO_RX_PLL_EN BIT(3)
> >
> > +static int imx6_pcie_clk_enable(struct imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie);
> > +
> I don't think this is strictly needed. Can you just move the placement of the
> new imx6_pcie_clk_enable function in the file, such that we can avoid the
> forward declaration?
>
[Richard Zhu] Thanks for your quickly review.
Okay, would move the placement to avoid he forward declaration.
> > static int pcie_phy_poll_ack(struct imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie, bool
> > exp_val) {
> > struct dw_pcie *pci = imx6_pcie->pci; @@ -498,33 +500,12 @@ static
> > void imx6_pcie_deassert_core_reset(struct imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > - ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie_phy);
> > - if (ret) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie_phy clock\n");
> > - goto err_pcie_phy;
> > - }
> > -
> > - ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie_bus);
> > + ret = imx6_pcie_clk_enable(imx6_pcie);
> > if (ret) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie_bus clock\n");
> > - goto err_pcie_bus;
> > + dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie clocks\n");
> > + goto err_clks;
> > }
> >
> > - ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie);
> > - if (ret) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie clock\n");
> > - goto err_pcie;
> > - }
> > -
> > - ret = imx6_pcie_enable_ref_clk(imx6_pcie);
> > - if (ret) {
> > - dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie ref clock\n");
> > - goto err_ref_clk;
> > - }
> > -
> > - /* allow the clocks to stabilize */
> > - usleep_range(200, 500);
> > -
> > /* Some boards don't have PCIe reset GPIO. */
> > if (gpio_is_valid(imx6_pcie->reset_gpio)) {
> > gpio_set_value_cansleep(imx6_pcie->reset_gpio,
> > @@ -578,13 +559,7 @@ static void imx6_pcie_deassert_core_reset(struct
> > imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie)
> >
> > return;
> >
> > -err_ref_clk:
> > - clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie);
> > -err_pcie:
> > - clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie_bus);
> > -err_pcie_bus:
> > - clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie_phy);
> > -err_pcie_phy:
> > +err_clks:
> > if (imx6_pcie->vpcie && regulator_is_enabled(imx6_pcie->vpcie) > 0) {
> > ret = regulator_disable(imx6_pcie->vpcie);
> > if (ret)
> > @@ -914,6 +889,51 @@ static void imx6_pcie_pm_turnoff(struct
> imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie)
> > usleep_range(1000, 10000);
> > }
> >
> > +static int imx6_pcie_clk_enable(struct imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie) {
> > + struct dw_pcie *pci = imx6_pcie->pci;
> > + struct device *dev = pci->dev;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie_phy);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie_phy clock\n");
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie_bus);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie_bus clock\n");
> > + goto err_pcie_bus;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = clk_prepare_enable(imx6_pcie->pcie);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie clock\n");
> > + goto err_pcie;
> > + }
> > +
> > + ret = imx6_pcie_enable_ref_clk(imx6_pcie);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + dev_err(dev, "unable to enable pcie ref clock\n");
> > + goto err_ref_clk;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* allow the clocks to stabilize */
> > + usleep_range(200, 500);
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +err_ref_clk:
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie);
> > +err_pcie:
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie_bus);
> > +err_pcie_bus:
> > + clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie_phy);
> > +
> > + return ret;
> > +
> Superfluous newline.
[Richard Zhu]Got that. Blank line would be removed later.
Thanks.
>
> Regards,
> Lucas
>
> > +}
> > +
> > static void imx6_pcie_clk_disable(struct imx6_pcie *imx6_pcie) {
> > clk_disable_unprepare(imx6_pcie->pcie);
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists