linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 09/12] watchdog: s3c2410: Cleanup PMU related code

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPLW+4ny7GO8i4XYJuMxjwkj1kAj=Nbj0+718UWiNk3mx554vw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 28 Nov 2021 21:18:45 +0200
From:   Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>,
        linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/12] watchdog: s3c2410: Cleanup PMU related code

On Sun, 28 Nov 2021 at 19:56, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>
> On 11/27/21 2:52 PM, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 01:30, Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 24 Nov 2021 at 00:33, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 11/23/21 8:17 AM, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 at 18:06, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Nov 21, 2021 at 06:56:44PM +0200, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> >>>>>> Now that PMU enablement code was extended for new Exynos SoCs, it
> >>>>>> doesn't look very cohesive and consistent anymore. Do a bit of renaming,
> >>>>>> grouping and style changes, to make it look good again. While at it, add
> >>>>>> quirks documentation as well.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No functional change, just a refactoring commit.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
> >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
> >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>> Changes in v4:
> >>>>>>     - Added R-b tag by Guenter Roeck
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Changes in v3:
> >>>>>>     - Added quirks documentation
> >>>>>>     - Added R-b tag by Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Changes in v2:
> >>>>>>     - (none): it's a new patch
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>    drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> >>>>>>    1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c
> >>>>>> index ec341c876225..f211be8bf976 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c
> >>>>>> @@ -56,17 +56,51 @@
> >>>>>>    #define EXYNOS5_RST_STAT_REG_OFFSET          0x0404
> >>>>>>    #define EXYNOS5_WDT_DISABLE_REG_OFFSET               0x0408
> >>>>>>    #define EXYNOS5_WDT_MASK_RESET_REG_OFFSET    0x040c
> >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_PMU_CONFIG                 (1 << 0)
> >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_RST_STAT                   (1 << 1)
> >>>>>> -#define QUIRK_HAS_WTCLRINT_REG                       (1 << 2)
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>>> +/**
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0-day complains:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c:94: warning: expecting prototype for Quirk flags for different Samsung watchdog IP(). Prototype was for QUIRK_HAS_WTCLRINT_REG() instead
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It doesn't seem to like the idea of documented bit masks. Not really sure
> >>>>> what to do here. I am inclined to ignore it, but I don't want to get flooded
> >>>>> by 0-day complaints until I retire either. Any idea ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Seems like 0-day thinks this kernel-doc comment is for the first
> >>>> define only, and thus the comment has wrong format, or something like
> >>>> that. I tried to follow the same style as GFP_KERNEL and others are
> >>>> documented.
> >>>>
> >>>> Anyway, if you don't like 0-day complaints, can you please just
> >>>> replace kernel-doc comment (/**) with regular comment (/*), by
> >>>> removing one asterisk in the patch? Or I can re-send the patch
> >>>> correspondingly -- then just let me know.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Oh, never mind. Let's just hope that 0-day stops complaining at some point.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Just sent v5 for this patch, fixing that 0-day warning properly. Found
> >> info about it here: [1]. So to check that warning, apparently it's
> >> enough to run "make W=n" build, or dry-run for kernel-doc script like
> >> this:
> >>
> >>      $ scripts/kernel-doc -v -none drivers/watchdog/s3c2410_wdt.c
> >>
> >> Anyway, please take v4 series + v5 for this patch. Hope that'll be all
> >> for 0-day swearing :)
> >>
> >> [1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/Documentation/doc-guide/kernel-doc.rst
> >>
> >
> > Hi Guenter,
> >
> > Can you please take this patch:
> >
> >      [PATCH v4 12/12] watchdog: s3c2410: Add Exynos850 support
> >
> > and replace "Cleanup PMU related code" patch you already applied with this one:
> >
> >      [PATCH v5] watchdog: s3c2410: Cleanup PMU related code
> >
> > I can see you already took most of WDT patches I sent, but those two
> > seem to be missing.
> >
>
> Upstream work is always "time permitting". Done now.
>

Thank you, Guenter!

> > Also, I can't see my patches (which are already present in your
> > "watchdog-next" branch) in linux-next/master. Is that expected, or I'm
> > missing something?
> >
> My watchdog-next branch is for 0-day coverage only. It is not made
> available in linux-next. linux-next pulls watchdog related changes
> from the official watchdog repository at
> git://www.linux-watchdog.org/linux-watchdog-next.git#master
>
> Guenter