linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] rtc: nuvoton: Compatible with NCT3015Y-R and NCT3018Y-R

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2023082322124382cfd168@mail.local>
Date:   Thu, 24 Aug 2023 00:12:43 +0200
From:   Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To:     Mia Lin <mimi05633@...il.com>
Cc:     avifishman70@...il.com, tmaimon77@...il.com, tali.perry1@...il.com,
        venture@...gle.com, yuenn@...gle.com, benjaminfair@...gle.com,
        a.zummo@...ertech.it, KWLIU@...oton.com, JJLIU0@...oton.com,
        KFLIN@...oton.com, mylin1@...oton.com, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] rtc: nuvoton: Compatible with NCT3015Y-R and
 NCT3018Y-R

Hello,

On 16/08/2023 09:25:40+0800, Mia Lin wrote:
> -	dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s:alarm_enable:%x alarm_flag:%x\n",
> -		__func__, *alarm_enable, *alarm_flag);
> +	if (alarm_enable && alarm_flag)

I don't really see the point of conditionally displaying this debug
message.

> +		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: alarm_enable=%x, alarm_flag=%x.\n",
> +			__func__, *alarm_enable, *alarm_flag);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
> @@ -123,17 +124,17 @@ static irqreturn_t nct3018y_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  	unsigned char alarm_flag;
>  	unsigned char alarm_enable;
>  
> -	dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s:irq:%d\n", __func__, irq);
> +	dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: irq=%d.\n", __func__, irq);

You have many of those changes where you only add a space, I feel like
this is a matter of taste and this makes it more difficult than
necessary to read your patch.

>  	err = nct3018y_get_alarm_mode(nct3018y->client, &alarm_enable, &alarm_flag);
>  	if (err)
>  		return IRQ_NONE;
>  
>  	if (alarm_flag) {
> -		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s:alarm flag:%x\n",
> +		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: alarm flag=%x.\n",
>  			__func__, alarm_flag);
>  		rtc_update_irq(nct3018y->rtc, 1, RTC_IRQF | RTC_AF);
>  		nct3018y_set_alarm_mode(nct3018y->client, 0);
> -		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s:IRQ_HANDLED\n", __func__);
> +		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: IRQ_HANDLED.\n", __func__);
>  		return IRQ_HANDLED;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -155,7 +156,7 @@ static int nct3018y_rtc_read_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
>  		return err;
>  
>  	if (!buf[0]) {
> -		dev_dbg(&client->dev, " voltage <=1.7, date/time is not reliable.\n");
> +		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: voltage <=1.7, date/time is not reliable.\n", __func__);
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -178,26 +179,50 @@ static int nct3018y_rtc_set_time(struct device *dev, struct rtc_time *tm)
>  {
>  	struct i2c_client *client = to_i2c_client(dev);
>  	unsigned char buf[4] = {0};
> -	int err;
> +	int err, part_num, flags;
> +	int restore_flags = 0;
> +
> +	part_num = i2c_smbus_read_byte_data(client, NCT3018Y_REG_PART);

Do you really have to check the part number every time you set the time?
I don't expect it to change once read in probe.

> +	if (part_num < 0) {
> +		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "%s: Failed to read part info reg.\n", __func__);
> +		return part_num;
> +	}
> +

-- 
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com