linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V4] mmc: sdhci-msm: Reset GCC_SDCC

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: <fb6480f6-f004-c02d-09fe-92a64785a0c5@quicinc.com>
Date:   Thu, 21 Apr 2022 10:32:57 +0530
From:   "Sajida Bhanu (Temp)" <quic_c_sbhanu@...cinc.com>
To:     Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        <agross@...nel.org>, <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, <chris@...ntf.net>,
        <venkatg@...eaurora.org>, <gdjakov@...sol.com>,
        <quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com>
CC:     <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <quic_rampraka@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_pragalla@...cinc.com>, <quic_sartgarg@...cinc.com>,
        <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>, <quic_sayalil@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] mmc: sdhci-msm: Reset GCC_SDCC_BCR register for SDHC

Hi,

Thanks for the review.

Please find the inline comments.

Thanks,

Sajida

On 4/19/2022 12:52 PM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Hi Sajida,
>
> On Di, 2022-04-19 at 11:46 +0530, Sajida Bhanu (Temp) wrote:
> [...]
>>>> +static int sdhci_msm_gcc_reset(struct device *dev, struct sdhci_host *host)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct reset_control *reset;
>>>> +	int ret = 0;
>>> No need to initialize ret.
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +	reset = reset_control_get_optional_exclusive(dev, NULL);
>>>> +	if (IS_ERR(reset))
>>>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(reset),
>>>> +				"unable to acquire core_reset\n");
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (!reset)
>>>> +		return ret;
>> Here we are returning ret directly if reset is NULL , so ret
>> initialization is required.
> You are right. I would just "return 0;" here, but this is correct as
> is.
Ok
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = reset_control_assert(reset);
>>>> +	if (ret)
>>>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "core_reset assert failed\n");
>>> Missing reset_control_put(reset) in the error path.
>> Sure will add
>>>> +
>>>> +	/*
>>>> +	 * The hardware requirement for delay between assert/deassert
>>>> +	 * is at least 3-4 sleep clock (32.7KHz) cycles, which comes to
>>>> +	 * ~125us (4/32768). To be on the safe side add 200us delay.
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	usleep_range(200, 210);
>>>> +
>>>> +	ret = reset_control_deassert(reset);
>>>> +	if (ret)
>>>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "core_reset deassert failed\n");
>>> Same as above. Maybe make both ret = dev_err_probe() and goto ...
>> In both cases error message is different so I think goto not good idea here.
> You could goto after the error message. Either way is fine.

Sorry didn't get this ..can  you please help

>
> regards
> Philipp