linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 4/7] soc: starfive: Add pmu type operation

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]

Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2023 21:52:33 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@...rfivetech.com>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Emil Renner Berthing <kernel@...il.dk>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Walker Chen <walker.chen@...rfivetech.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/7] soc: starfive: Add pmu type operation

Hey Changhuang Liang,

On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 11:47:40PM -0700, Changhuang Liang wrote:
> Add pmu type, make a distinction between different PMU.

Please write more detailed commit messages, thanks.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Changhuang Liang <changhuang.liang@...rfivetech.com>
> ---
>  drivers/soc/starfive/jh71xx_pmu.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------
>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/starfive/jh71xx_pmu.c b/drivers/soc/starfive/jh71xx_pmu.c
> index 306218c83691..98f6849d61de 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/starfive/jh71xx_pmu.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/starfive/jh71xx_pmu.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,12 @@
>   */
>  #define JH71XX_PMU_TIMEOUT_US		100
>  
> +/* pmu type */

Delete this comment, it's obvious.

> +enum pmu_type {
> +	JH71XX_PMU_GENERAL,

I'm really not sold on GENERAL as a name.
Why not name these after the compatibles?

> +	JH71XX_PMU_DPHY,
> +};
> +
>  struct jh71xx_domain_info {
>  	const char * const name;
>  	unsigned int flags;
> @@ -54,6 +60,7 @@ struct jh71xx_domain_info {
>  struct jh71xx_pmu_match_data {
>  	const struct jh71xx_domain_info *domain_info;
>  	int num_domains;
> +	u8 pmu_type;

This is an enum, not a u8?

Thanks,
Conor.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)