linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] ASoC: starfive: Cleanup and fix error check for JH7110 TDM

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: <d941ac20-e8b3-cb13-4258-3a9a86e978d3@starfivetech.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2023 10:15:03 +0800
From:   Walker Chen <walker.chen@...rfivetech.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     Claudiu Beznea <Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ASoC: starfive: Cleanup and fix error check for JH7110
 TDM


On 2023/6/7 19:44, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 04:14:39PM +0800, Walker Chen wrote:
> 
>> Some minor issues were found during addtional testing and static
>> analysis. The patch fixed these minor issues.
>> 1.Use BIT() macro to indicate configuration for TDM registers.
>> 
>> 2.Fix the check for devm_reset_control_array_get_exclusive return
>> value. The devm_reset_control_array_get_exclusive() function may return
>> NULL if it's an optional request. If optional is intended then NULL
>> should not be treated as an error case, but as a special kind of success
>> case. So here the IS_ERR() is used to check better.
> 
> As covered in submitting-patches.rst please submit one patch per change
> rather than combining multiple changes into a single patch, it makes
> things much easier to review and handle.
Hi Mark,

Thanks for your review.
OK, I will submit a single patch for each change in the next version.

> 
>> -	datarx = (tdm->rx.ifl << IFL_BIT) |
>> -		  (tdm->rx.wl << WL_BIT) |
>> -		  (tdm->rx.sscale << SSCALE_BIT) |
>> -		  (tdm->rx.sl << SL_BIT) |
>> -		  (tdm->rx.lrj << LRJ_BIT);
>> +	datarx = (tdm->rxwl << 8) |
>> +		  (tdm->rxsscale << 4) |
>> +		  (tdm->rxsl << 2) |
>> +		  TDM_PCMRXCR_LEFT_J;
> 
> I'm not sure this change to use numbers here is a win - the _BIT
> definitions look fine (I might've called them _SHIFT but whatever).

This is Claudiu's advice. Using the macro BIT() to replace these definition of *_BIT, 
it will result in big changes in the code.
Please refer to previous comments:
 https://lore.kernel.org/all/143e2fa2-e85d-8036-4f74-ca250c026c1b@microchip.com/

@Claudiu What do think about this ?

> 
>> -static const struct of_device_id jh7110_tdm_of_match[] = {
>> +static const struct of_device_id jh7110_tdm_match[] = {
>>  	{ .compatible = "starfive,jh7110-tdm", },
>>  	{}
>>  };
>>  
>> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, jh7110_tdm_of_match);
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, jh7110_tdm_match);
> 
> This rename wasn't mentioned in the changelog.
Will be added in the change log.

Best regards,
Walker