| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 22:03:05 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Anand Ashok Dumbre <anand.ashok.dumbre@...inx.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jic23@...nel.org, lars@...afoo.de,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, git@...inx.com, michal.simek@...inx.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com,
Manish Narani <manish.narani@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/5] iio: adc: Add Xilinx AMS driver
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021 at 04:10:26PM +0000, Anand Ashok Dumbre wrote:
> The AMS includes an ADC as well as on-chip sensors that can be used to
> sample external voltages and monitor on-die operating conditions, such
> as temperature and supply voltage levels. The AMS has two SYSMON blocks.
> PL-SYSMON block is capable of monitoring off chip voltage and
> temperature.
>
> PL-SYSMON block has DRP, JTAG and I2C interface to enable monitoring
> from an external master. Out of these interfaces currently only DRP is
> supported. Other block PS-SYSMON is memory mapped to PS.
>
> The AMS can use internal channels to monitor voltage and temperature as
> well as one primary and up to 16 auxiliary channels for measuring
> external voltages.
>
> The voltage and temperature monitoring channels also have event capability
> which allows to generate an interrupt when their value falls below or
> raises above a set threshold.
Thanks for an update, my comments below.
...
Missed bitfields.h as kbuild bot noticed.
> +#include <linux/bits.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/iopoll.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
> +#include <linux/overflow.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/property.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
...
> +#define AMS_ALARM_THR_DIRECT_MASK BIT(1)
> +#define AMS_ALARM_THR_MIN ~(BIT(16) - 1)
This is wrong. I already said it.
> +#define AMS_ALARM_THR_MAX (BIT(16) - 1)
...
> +enum ams_alarm_bit {
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_TEMP,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY1,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY2,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY3,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY4,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY5,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY6,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_RESERVED,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY7,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY8,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY9,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY10,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_VCCAMS,
> + AMS_ALARM_BIT_TEMP_REMOTE
+Comma, same to the rest where the last item is not a terminator one.
> +};
> +
> +enum ams_seq {
> + AMS_SEQ_VCC_PSPLL,
> + AMS_SEQ_VCC_PSBATT,
> + AMS_SEQ_VCCINT,
> + AMS_SEQ_VCCBRAM,
> + AMS_SEQ_VCCAUX,
> + AMS_SEQ_PSDDRPLL,
> + AMS_SEQ_INTDDR
...like here.
> +};
> +enum ams_ps_pl_seq {
> + AMS_SEQ_CALIB,
> + AMS_SEQ_RSVD_1,
> + AMS_SEQ_RSVD_2,
> + AMS_SEQ_TEST,
> + AMS_SEQ_RSVD_4,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY4,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY5,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY6,
> + AMS_SEQ_TEMP,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY2,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY1,
> + AMS_SEQ_VP_VN,
> + AMS_SEQ_VREFP,
> + AMS_SEQ_VREFN,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY3,
> + AMS_SEQ_CURRENT_MON,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY7,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY8,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY9,
> + AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY10,
> + AMS_SEQ_VCCAMS,
> + AMS_SEQ_TEMP_REMOTE,
> + AMS_SEQ_MAX
...but not here!
> +};
...
> +#define AMS_SEQ(x) (AMS_SEQ_MAX + (x))
> +#define AMS_VAUX_SEQ(x) (AMS_SEQ_MAX + (x))
What's the difference?
> +#define AMS_PS_SEQ_MAX AMS_SEQ_MAX
Perhaps this should be above (for the sake of easier reading).
> +#define PS_SEQ(x) (x)
> +#define PL_SEQ(x) (AMS_PS_SEQ_MAX + (x))
> +#define AMS_CTRL_SEQ_BASE (AMS_PS_SEQ_MAX * 3)
...
> + ret = readl_poll_timeout(ams->base + AMS_PS_CSTS, reg,
> + (reg & expect), 0,
Parentheses are not needed.
WHy 0? Is it okay to load CPU like this?
> + AMS_INIT_TIMEOUT_US);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
...
> + if (ams->pl_base) {
> + reg = readl(ams->base + AMS_PL_CSTS);
> + if (reg == 0)
> + return (int) reg;
I already said that this is wrong.
> + writel(AMS_PL_RESET_VALUE, ams->pl_base + AMS_VP_VN);
> +
> + /* put sysmon in a default state */
> + ams_pl_update_reg(ams, AMS_REG_CONFIG1, AMS_CONF1_SEQ_MASK,
> + AMS_CONF1_SEQ_DEFAULT);
> + }
...
> + ret = readl_poll_timeout(ams->base + AMS_ISR_1, reg,
> + (reg & expect), 0, AMS_INIT_TIMEOUT_US);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
Same two comments as per above readl_poll_timeout() usage.
...
> + ret = ams_read_vcc_reg(ams, chan->address, val);
> + if (ret) {
> + mutex_unlock(&ams->lock);
> + return -EINVAL;
Shadowed error code.
> + }
...
> + case IIO_CHAN_INFO_OFFSET:
> + /* Only the temperature channel has an offset */
> + *val = AMS_TEMP_OFFSET;
> + return IIO_VAL_INT;
> + }
> + return -EINVAL;
Why not keep it in the default case?
…
> + switch (event) {
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_TEMP:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_TEMP;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY1:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY1;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY2:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY2;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY3:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY3;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY4:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY4;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY5:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY5;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY6:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY6;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY7:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY7;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY8:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY8;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY9:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY9;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_SUPPLY10:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_SUPPLY10;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_VCCAMS:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_VCCAMS;
> + break;
> + case AMS_ALARM_BIT_TEMP_REMOTE:
> + scan_index += AMS_SEQ_TEMP_REMOTE;
> + break;
default: ?
> + }
...
> + if (chan->type == IIO_TEMP) {
> + offset = ams_get_alarm_offset(chan->scan_index,
> + IIO_EV_DIR_FALLING);
One line?
> + }
...
> + const struct iio_chan_spec *chan;
> +
> + chan = ams_event_to_channel(indio_dev, event);
Can be done in one line.
> + /* Only process alarms that are not masked */
> + isr0 &= ~((ams->intr_mask & AMS_ISR0_ALARM_MASK) | ams->masked_alarm);
> +
Redundant blank line.
> + if (!isr0) {
> + spin_unlock(&ams->intr_lock);
> + return IRQ_NONE;
> + }
...
> + .mask_separate = BIT(IIO_EV_INFO_ENABLE) |
> + BIT(IIO_EV_INFO_VALUE),
One line?
...
> + fwnode_for_each_child_node(chan_node, child) {
> + ret = fwnode_property_read_u32(child, "reg", ®);
> + if (ret || reg > (AMS_PL_MAX_EXT_CHANNEL + 30))
Too many parentheses.
> + continue;
> + memcpy(&channels[num_channels], &ams_pl_channels[reg +
> + AMS_PL_MAX_FIXED_CHANNEL - 30], sizeof(*channels));
> +
> + if (fwnode_property_read_bool(child, "xlnx,bipolar"))
> + channels[num_channels].scan_type.sign = 's';
Use temporary variable for &channels[num_channels] in both cases.
> + num_channels++;
> + }
...
> + memcpy(channels + num_channels, ams_ps_channels,
> + sizeof(ams_ps_channels));
Ditto.
...
> + memcpy(channels + num_channels, ams_pl_channels,
> + AMS_PL_MAX_FIXED_CHANNEL * sizeof(*channels));
Ditto.
...
> + memcpy(channels + num_channels, ams_ctrl_channels,
> + sizeof(ams_ctrl_channels));
Ditto.
...
> +static int ams_parse_firmware(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
> + struct platform_device *pdev)
Why do you need second parameter? Doesn't indio_dev already have it?
> +{
> + struct ams *ams = iio_priv(indio_dev);
> + struct iio_chan_spec *ams_channels, *dev_channels;
> + struct fwnode_handle *child = NULL, *fwnode = dev_fwnode(&pdev->dev);
> + size_t dev_chan_size, ams_chan_size, num_chan;
> + int ret, ch_cnt = 0, i, rising_off, falling_off;
> + unsigned int num_channels = 0;
> +
> +
One blank line is enough.
> + num_chan = ARRAY_SIZE(ams_ps_channels) + ARRAY_SIZE(ams_pl_channels) +
> + ARRAY_SIZE(ams_ctrl_channels);
> + ams_chan_size = array_size(num_chan, sizeof(struct iio_chan_spec));
> + if (ams_chan_size == SIZE_MAX)
> + return -EINVAL;
Why is this needed now since you are using kcalloc()?
> + /* Initialize buffer for channel specification */
> + ams_channels = kcalloc(num_chan, sizeof(struct iio_chan_spec), GFP_KERNEL);
sizeof(*ams_channels)
> + if (!ams_channels)
> + return -ENOMEM;
...
> + ret = ams_init_module(indio_dev, child,
> + ams_channels + num_channels);
One line?
...
> + writel(AMS_ALARM_THR_MIN,
> + ams->pl_base + falling_off);
> + writel(AMS_ALARM_THR_MAX,
> + ams->pl_base + rising_off);
Ditto.
...
> + writel(AMS_ALARM_THR_MIN,
> + ams->ps_base + falling_off);
> + writel(AMS_ALARM_THR_MAX,
> + ams->ps_base + rising_off);
Ditto.
> + dev_chan_size = array_size((size_t)num_channels, sizeof(struct iio_chan_spec));
> + if (dev_chan_size == SIZE_MAX)
> + return -EINVAL;
Why is it needed now?
> + dev_channels = devm_kcalloc(&pdev->dev, (size_t)num_channels,
Why casting?
> + sizeof(struct iio_chan_spec), GFP_KERNEL);
sizeof(*dev_channels)
> + if (!dev_channels) {
> + ret = -ENOMEM;
> + goto free_mem;
> + }
> + memcpy(dev_channels, ams_channels,
> + sizeof(*ams_channels) * num_channels);
Hmm... according to the code the num_channels can be less than or equal to
num_chan. Hence, what you should use is the devm_krealloc_array().
static inline void *devm_krealloc_aray(...)
{
...see how krealloc_array() is defined...
}
No need to copy memory again.
...
> + ret = 0;
> +
> +free_mem:
> + kfree(ams_channels);
> +
> + return ret;
This will go away after switching to devm_kmalloc_array() +
devm_krealloc_array().
...
> + ret = ams_parse_firmware(indio_dev, pdev);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret, "failure in parsing DT\n");
> + return ret;
return dev_err_probe(...);
Ditto for the rest similar cases.
> + }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists