linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: designware: Introduce semaphore reservation timer to AMDPSP driver

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: <CAOtMz3Ptx-xoGUUtAbssJsggmKrD+rX3nv6KMo3LJOE3ip0RYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:35:49 +0200
From:   Jan Dąbroś <jsd@...ihalf.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
        mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com, rrangel@...omium.org,
        mw@...ihalf.com, upstream@...ihalf.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c: designware: Introduce semaphore reservation timer
 to AMDPSP driver

sob., 20 sie 2022 o 08:30 Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org> napisał(a):
>
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 09:15:26AM +0200, Jan Dabros wrote:
> > In order to optimize performance, limit amount of back and forth
> > transactions between x86 and PSP. This is done by introduction of
> > semaphore reservation period - that is window in which x86 isn't
> > releasing the bus immediately after each I2C transaction.
> >
> > In order to protect PSP from being starved while waiting for
> > arbitration, after a programmed time bus is automatically released by a
> > deferred function.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jan Dabros <jsd@...ihalf.com>
>
> Fixed this checkpatch check:
>
> CHECK: Blank lines aren't necessary after an open brace '{'
> #60: FILE: drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-amdpsp.c:265:

Are you using the default checkpatch.pl script available on the top of
tree kernel baseline? For some reason my checkpatch.pl hasn't reported
this, but (due to operational error) I used the version of script from
5.10 stabilize branch..

> and applied to for-next, thanks!

Thanks!

Best Regards,
Jan