linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] i2c: designware: Add helper to remove redundancy

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: <5612fbbe-a42b-997e-2375-6d5f0c53bdea@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Mar 2022 16:52:09 +0200
From:   Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     wsa@...nel.org, upstream@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] i2c: designware: Add helper to remove redundancy

On 3/10/22 16:22, Jan Dabros wrote:
> Simplify code by adding an extra static function for sending I2C
> requests and verifying results.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>
> ---
>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c | 44 ++++++++++++----------
>   1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
Do I remember correctly was this suggested by Andy? I.e. to give kudos 
to him if that was the case:

Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>

> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c
> index c64e459afb5c..cc758792f150 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c
> @@ -229,6 +229,26 @@ static int psp_send_i2c_req(enum psp_i2c_req_type i2c_req_type)
>   	return ret;
>   }
>   
> +static int psp_send_i2c_req_check_err(enum psp_i2c_req_type request)
> +{
> +	int status;
> +
> +	status = psp_send_i2c_req(request);
> +	if (status) {
> +		if (status == -ETIMEDOUT)
> +			dev_err(psp_i2c_dev, "Timed out waiting for PSP to %s I2C bus\n",
> +				(request == PSP_I2C_REQ_ACQUIRE) ?
> +				"release" : "acquire");
> +		else
> +			dev_err(psp_i2c_dev, "PSP communication error\n");
> +
> +		dev_err(psp_i2c_dev, "Assume i2c bus is for exclusive host usage\n");
> +		psp_i2c_mbox_fail = true;
> +	}
> +

Does it make sense to have these inside the psp_send_i2c_req() and get 
rid of this new middle function? I mean psp_send_i2c_req() is called now 
only from here so can it do these common error prints and set 
"psp_i2c_mbox_fail = true"?

Jarkko