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: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 12:31:50 -0400 From: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@...o.com> To: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com> Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, "Z.Q. Hou" <zhiqiang.hou@....com>, Biwen Li <biwen.li@....com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] irqchip/ls-extirq: fix invalid wait context by avoiding to use regmap On 7/28/22 12:19 PM, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 11:43:40AM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote: >> > All of this should be rewritten to use of_device_is_big_endian(), and >> > reduce the whole thing to two cases (I don't think native endian makes >> > much sense anyway). I also wonder what the result is if none of these >> > properties is present... >> >> I think regmap_get_val_endian would be better here. > > It needs a struct device. > >> >> + >> >> + priv->regmap = regmap_init_mmio(NULL, base, &extirq_regmap_config); >> >> It could also be done automatically if we pass the syscon dev instead of >> NULL. The only downside is that some regmap error messages will use the >> syscon device > > How do you get the struct device of the syscon? Oh, interesting, we don't have a device in this driver. >> > Finally, what is the actual benefit of using a regmap here? It seems >> > like a very roundabout way of performing a RMW on a register whilst >> > holding a lock... Passing NULL for a device to regmap_init_mmio() also >> > seems to be an extremely rare idiom (only 5 cases in the tree), and >> > this doesn't seem completely right to me. >> >> The benefit is that you don't have to write (yet another) set of >> endian-converting read/write functions. The above (non-NULL) usage of >> regmap_init would also address your criticism here. > > I don't have a particular attraction towards using regmap for a single > register either, to be honest. > Yeah I suppose it's not a terrible burden here. --Sean
Powered by blists - more mailing lists