| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <24425fcb-608d-e5be-a799-ac839b0b5953@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 13:46:31 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: William-tw Lin <william-tw.lin@...iatek.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>
Cc: Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] soc: mediatek: mtk-socinfo: Add driver for getting
chip information
On 18/07/2023 13:21, William-tw Lin wrote:
> Add driver for socinfo retrieval. This patch includes the following:
> 1. mtk-socinfo driver for chip info retrieval
> 2. Related changes to Makefile and Kconfig
>
> Signed-off-by: William-tw Lin <william-tw.lin@...iatek.com>
> ---
...
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MTK_SOCINFO_DEBUG)
> +static int mtk_socinfo_socinfo_debug_show(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
> +{
> + struct mtk_socinfo *mtk_socinfop = (struct mtk_socinfo *)m->private;
> +
> + seq_printf(m, "SOC Manufacturer: %s\n", soc_manufacturer);
> + seq_printf(m, "SOC Name: %s\n", mtk_socinfop->name_data->soc_name);
> + seq_printf(m, "SOC segment Name: %s\n", mtk_socinfop->name_data->soc_segment_name);
> + seq_printf(m, "Marketing Name: %s\n", mtk_socinfop->name_data->marketing_name);
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +DEBUG_FOPS_RO(socinfo);
No, there is socinfo for this.
...
> +
> +static int mtk_socinfo_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + struct mtk_socinfo *mtk_socinfop;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + mtk_socinfop = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*mtk_socinfop), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!mtk_socinfop)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + mtk_socinfop->dev = &pdev->dev;
> + mtk_socinfop->soc_data = (struct socinfo_data *)of_device_get_match_data(mtk_socinfop->dev);
Why do you need the cast?
> + if (!mtk_socinfop->soc_data) {
> + dev_err(mtk_socinfop->dev, "No mtk-socinfo platform data found\n");
> + return -EPERM;
EPERM? Is this correct errno? How is it even possible?
> + }
> +
> + ret = mtk_socinfo_get_socinfo_data(mtk_socinfop);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(mtk_socinfop->dev, "Failed to get socinfo data (ret = %d)\n", ret);
> + return -EINVAL;
return dev_err_probe
> + }
> +
> + ret = mtk_socinfo_create_socinfo_node(mtk_socinfop);
> + if (ret != 0) {
> + dev_err(mtk_socinfop->dev, "Failed to create socinfo node (ret = %d)\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MTK_SOCINFO_DEBUG)
Drop #if. If you need to make it conditional, then use standard C code.
> + ret = mtk_socinfo_create_debug_cmds(mtk_socinfop);
> + if (ret != 0) {
> + dev_err(mtk_socinfop->dev, "Failed to create socinfo debug node (ret = %d)\n", ret);
> + return ret;
No, we do not print failures and definitely do not fail probing on
debugfs! Come one...
> + }
> +#endif
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int mtk_socinfo_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> + if (soc_dev)
> + soc_device_unregister(soc_dev);
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_MTK_SOCINFO_DEBUG)
Same
> + debugfs_remove(file_entry);
> +#endif
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct platform_driver mtk_socinfo = {
> + .probe = mtk_socinfo_probe,
> + .remove = mtk_socinfo_remove,
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "mtk_socinfo",
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .of_match_table = mtk_socinfo_id_table,
> + },
> +};
> +module_platform_driver(mtk_socinfo);
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("William-TW LIN <william-tw.lin@...iatek.com>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("Mediatek socinfo driver");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-socinfo.h b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-socinfo.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8fd490311c8b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-socinfo.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> + *
> + * Copyright (c) 2023 MediaTek Inc.
> + */
> +
> +#ifndef __MTK_SOCINFO_H__
> +#define __MTK_SOCINFO_H__
> +
> +#define MODULE_NAME "[mtk-socinfo]"
No, drop.
> +
> +#define DEBUG_FOPS_RO(name) \
> + static int mtk_socinfo_##name##_debug_open(struct inode *inode, \
> + struct file *filp) \
> + { \
> + return single_open(filp, mtk_socinfo_##name##_debug_show, \
> + inode->i_private); \
> + } \
> + static const struct file_operations mtk_socinfo_##name##_debug_fops = { \
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE, \
> + .open = mtk_socinfo_##name##_debug_open, \
> + .read = seq_read, \
> + .llseek = seq_lseek, \
> + .release = single_release, \
> + }
> +
> +#define MTK_SOCINFO_DENTRY_DATA(name) {__stringify(name), &mtk_socinfo_##name##_debug_fops}
> +
> +const char *soc_manufacturer = "MediaTek";
global variable in the header? No, drop.
> +
> +struct soc_device *soc_dev;
> +struct dentry *mtk_socinfo_dir, *file_entry;
Why do you need them in the header?
> +
> +struct mtk_socinfo {
> + struct device *dev;
> + struct name_data *name_data;
> + struct socinfo_data *soc_data;
> +};
> +
> +struct efuse_data {
> + char *nvmem_cell_name;
> + u32 efuse_data;
> +};
> +
> +struct name_data {
> + char *soc_name;
> + char *soc_segment_name;
> + char *marketing_name;
> +};
> +
> +struct socinfo_data {
> + char *soc_name;
> + struct efuse_data *efuse_data;
> + struct name_data *name_data;
> + unsigned int efuse_segment_count;
> + unsigned int efuse_data_count;
> +};
> +
> +enum socinfo_data_index {
> + INDEX_MT8186 = 0,
> + INDEX_MT8188,
> + INDEX_MT8195,
> + INDEX_MT8192,
> + INDEX_MT8183,
> + INDEX_MT8173,
> + SOCINFO_DATA_LAST_INDEX
> +};
> +
> +/* begin 8186 info */
> +#define mtk_mt8186_EFUSE_DATA_COUNT 1
> +static struct efuse_data mtk_mt8186_efuse_data_info[][mtk_mt8186_EFUSE_DATA_COUNT] = {
Nope. Don't put variable in the header. This code is not yet ready to
upstream.
Work with your colleagues to submit something passing basic coding
style. Please send something reasonable, after doing internal reviews.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists