linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 -next 1/5] spi: mockup: Add SPI controller testing driver

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 18 Nov 2023 19:07:06 +0800
From:   huaweicloud <zhangxiaoxu@...weicloud.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     zhangxiaoxu5@...wei.com, weiyongjun1@...wei.com,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com, frowand.list@...il.com,
        linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 -next 1/5] spi: mockup: Add SPI controller testing
 driver

Hi Mark,

Thanks for your review.

Most of the comments have been modified. and the v4 has been sent
to the maillist, as has the KDDV (Kernel Device Driver Verfication)
test framework based on python unittests.

Looking forward for your comments.

Thanks.


在 2023/11/6 19:59, Mark Brown 写道:
> On Sat, Nov 04, 2023 at 02:46:46PM +0800, Zhang Xiaoxu wrote:
> 
>> This is accomplished by executing the following command:
>>
>> $ echo adcxx1s 0 > /sys/class/spi_master/spi0/new_device
> 
> That's not a valid sysfs format, sysfs requires one value per file.
> configfs might be a better fit?
> 
>> +config SPI_MOCKUP
>> +	tristate "SPI controller Testing Driver"
>> +	depends on OF
> 
> Why would this depend on DT?  Given that any test SPI controller is a
> virtual device it should never appear in DT and we probably shouldn't
> require providing DT for the created devices even if we implement
> support for that, only some devices might care.
> `
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-mockup.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,211 @@
>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
>> +/*
>> + * SPI controller Testing Driver
>> + *
>> + * Copyright(c) 2022 Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
>> + */
> 
> Please keep the entire comment a C++ one so things look more
> intentional.
> 
>> +#define MOCKUP_CHIPSELECT_MAX		8
> 
> Why would we have a hard coded limit here?
When register the spi controller, we need to specify the maximun
number of chips. Modify it to U16_MAX in next version.
> 
>> +	blank = strchr(buf, ' ');
>> +	if (!blank) {
>> +		dev_err(dev, "%s: Extra parameters\n", "new_device");
>> +		return -EINVAL;
>> +	}
> 
> There is no point in using %s to render a constant string.
> 
>> +static const struct of_device_id spi_mockup_match[] = {
>> +	{ .compatible = "spi-mockup", },
>> +	{ }
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, spi_mockup_match);
> 
> If we were going to instantiate this via DT we'd need a binding, but as
> I indicated above since this is purely virtual and not even something
> like virtual hardware provided by a VMM but rather just something kernel
> internal we should probably not be using DT at all.  Providing a device
> facing DT interface might be useful, but that's a second stage thing.