linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] scsi: ufs: qcom: Fix acquiring the optional reset control line

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: <20220423095423.GA374560@thinkpad>
Date:   Sat, 23 Apr 2022 15:24:23 +0530
From:   Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To:     Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@...hat.com>
Cc:     martin.petersen@...cle.com, jejb@...ux.ibm.com,
        avri.altman@....com, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        quic_asutoshd@...cinc.com, quic_cang@...cinc.com,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] scsi: ufs: qcom: Fix acquiring the optional reset
 control line

On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 10:40:10AM -0500, Andrew Halaney wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 06:51:36PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > On Qcom UFS platforms, the reset control line seems to be optional
> > (for SoCs like MSM8996 and probably for others too). The current logic
> > tries to mimic the `devm_reset_control_get_optional()` API but it also
> > continues the probe if there is an error with the declared reset line in
> > DT/ACPI.
> > 
> > In an ideal case, if the reset line is not declared in DT/ACPI, the probe
> > should continue. But if there is problem in acquiring the declared reset
> > line (like EPROBE_DEFER) it should fail and return the appropriate error
> > code.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c | 10 +++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> > index 0d2e950d0865..5db0fd922062 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufs-qcom.c
> > @@ -1002,13 +1002,13 @@ static int ufs_qcom_init(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> >  	host->hba = hba;
> >  	ufshcd_set_variant(hba, host);
> >  
> > -	/* Setup the reset control of HCI */
> > -	host->core_reset = devm_reset_control_get(hba->dev, "rst");
> > +	/* Setup the optional reset control of HCI */
> > +	host->core_reset = devm_reset_control_get_optional(hba->dev, "rst");
> >  	if (IS_ERR(host->core_reset)) {
> >  		err = PTR_ERR(host->core_reset);
> > -		dev_warn(dev, "Failed to get reset control %d\n", err);
> > -		host->core_reset = NULL;
> > -		err = 0;
> > +		if (err != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > +			dev_err(dev, "Failed to get reset control %d\n", err);
> 
> Could we use dev_err_probe() here?
> 

Yes. Will do the same for patch 2/5 as well.

Thanks,
Mani

> Otherwise, looks good to me.
> 
> > +		goto out_variant_clear;
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	/* Fire up the reset controller. Failure here is non-fatal. */
> > -- 
> > 2.25.1
> > 
>