| 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: <CAB9BWhcvVj-J-NyqQE6NBW_fNvMvbg9ZMkkMD26QnQexawbU0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 14:11:17 +0800
From: wenhua lin <wenhua.lin1994@...il.com>
To: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com>
Cc: Wenhua Lin <Wenhua.Lin@...soc.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Orson Zhai <orsonzhai@...il.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Chunyan Zhang <zhang.lyra@...il.com>,
linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xiongpeng Wu <xiongpeng.wu@...soc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: sprd: Modify the calculation method of eic number
Hi Hugo:
We will re-split the patch submission and explain our reasons for
modification in the submission information, thank you very much for
your review.
Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com> 于2023年8月9日周三 01:44写道：
>
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2023 11:31:06 +0800
> Wenhua Lin <Wenhua.Lin@...soc.com> wrote:
>
> > Automatic calculation through matching nodes,
> > subsequent projects can avoid modifying driver files.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wenhua Lin <Wenhua.Lin@...soc.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpio/gpio-eic-sprd.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> > 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-eic-sprd.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-eic-sprd.c
> > index 84352a6f4973..0d85d9e80848 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-eic-sprd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-eic-sprd.c
> > @@ -50,10 +50,10 @@
> > #define SPRD_EIC_SYNC_DATA 0x1c
> >
> > /*
> > - * The digital-chip EIC controller can support maximum 3 banks, and each bank
> > + * The digital-chip EIC controller can support maximum 8 banks, and each bank
> > * contains 8 EICs.
> > */
> > -#define SPRD_EIC_MAX_BANK 3
> > +#define SPRD_EIC_MAX_BANK 8
> > #define SPRD_EIC_PER_BANK_NR 8
> > #define SPRD_EIC_DATA_MASK GENMASK(7, 0)
> > #define SPRD_EIC_BIT(x) ((x) & (SPRD_EIC_PER_BANK_NR - 1))
> > @@ -99,33 +99,32 @@ struct sprd_eic {
> >
> > struct sprd_eic_variant_data {
> > enum sprd_eic_type type;
> > - u32 num_eics;
> > };
> >
> > +#define SPRD_EIC_VAR_DATA(soc_name) \
> > +static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data soc_name##_eic_dbnc_data = { \
> > + .type = SPRD_EIC_DEBOUNCE, \
> > +}; \
> > + \
> > +static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data soc_name##_eic_latch_data = { \
> > + .type = SPRD_EIC_LATCH, \
> > +}; \
> > + \
> > +static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data soc_name##_eic_async_data = { \
> > + .type = SPRD_EIC_ASYNC, \
> > +}; \
> > + \
> > +static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data soc_name##_eic_sync_data = { \
> > + .type = SPRD_EIC_SYNC, \
> > +}
> > +
> > +SPRD_EIC_VAR_DATA(sc9860);
> > +
> > static const char *sprd_eic_label_name[SPRD_EIC_MAX] = {
> > "eic-debounce", "eic-latch", "eic-async",
> > "eic-sync",
> > };
> >
> > -static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data sc9860_eic_dbnc_data = {
> > - .type = SPRD_EIC_DEBOUNCE,
> > - .num_eics = 8,
> > -};
> > -
> > -static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data sc9860_eic_latch_data = {
> > - .type = SPRD_EIC_LATCH,
> > - .num_eics = 8,
> > -};
> > -
> > -static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data sc9860_eic_async_data = {
> > - .type = SPRD_EIC_ASYNC,
> > - .num_eics = 8,
> > -};
> > -
> > -static const struct sprd_eic_variant_data sc9860_eic_sync_data = {
> > - .type = SPRD_EIC_SYNC,
> > - .num_eics = 8,
> > -};
> >
> > static inline void __iomem *sprd_eic_offset_base(struct sprd_eic *sprd_eic,
> > unsigned int bank)
> > @@ -583,6 +582,7 @@ static int sprd_eic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > struct sprd_eic *sprd_eic;
> > struct resource *res;
> > int ret, i;
> > + u16 num_banks = 0;
> >
> > pdata = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> > if (!pdata) {
> > @@ -613,12 +613,13 @@ static int sprd_eic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > break;
> >
> > sprd_eic->base[i] = devm_ioremap_resource(&pdev->dev, res);
> > + num_banks++;
> > if (IS_ERR(sprd_eic->base[i]))
> > return PTR_ERR(sprd_eic->base[i]);
> > }
> >
> > sprd_eic->chip.label = sprd_eic_label_name[sprd_eic->type];
> > - sprd_eic->chip.ngpio = pdata->num_eics;
> > + sprd_eic->chip.ngpio = num_banks * SPRD_EIC_PER_BANK_NR;
> > sprd_eic->chip.base = -1;
> > sprd_eic->chip.parent = &pdev->dev;
> > sprd_eic->chip.direction_input = sprd_eic_direction_input;
> > @@ -630,10 +631,12 @@ static int sprd_eic_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > sprd_eic->chip.set = sprd_eic_set;
> > fallthrough;
> > case SPRD_EIC_ASYNC:
> > + fallthrough;
>
> Hi,
> this probably should go in a separate patch as a fix or an
> improvement with proper comments explaining the reason?
>
> > case SPRD_EIC_SYNC:
> > sprd_eic->chip.get = sprd_eic_get;
> > break;
> > case SPRD_EIC_LATCH:
> > + fallthrough;
>
> ditto.
>
> Hugo Villeneuve
>
>
> > default:
> > break;
> > }
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists