linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 19/39] mtd: rawnand: add support for ts72xx

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

Date:   Wed, 22 Nov 2023 14:24:24 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To:     Nikita Shubin <nikita.shubin@...uefel.me>
Cc:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
        Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.de>,
        Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>,
        Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>,
        Johan Jonker <jbx6244@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 19/39] mtd: rawnand: add support for ts72xx

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 11:59:57AM +0300, Nikita Shubin wrote:
> Technologic Systems has it's own nand controller implementation in CPLD.

...

> +static int ts72xx_nand_attach_chip(struct nand_chip *chip)
> +{
> +	switch (chip->ecc.engine_type) {
> +	case NAND_ECC_ENGINE_TYPE_SOFT:
> +		if (chip->ecc.algo == NAND_ECC_ALGO_UNKNOWN)
> +			chip->ecc.algo = NAND_ECC_ALGO_HAMMING;
> +		chip->ecc.algo = NAND_ECC_ALGO_HAMMING;
> +		break;
> +	case NAND_ECC_ENGINE_TYPE_ON_HOST:
> +		return -EINVAL;

> +	default:
> +		break;
> +	}
> +
> +	return 0;

Move this to default.

> +}

...

> +		for (i = 0; i < instr->ctx.addr.naddrs; i++)
> +			iowrite8(instr->ctx.addr.addrs[i], data->base);

iowrite8_rep() ?

> +	case NAND_OP_DATA_IN_INSTR:
> +		ioread8_rep(data->base, instr->ctx.data.buf.in, instr->ctx.data.len);

Hehe, you are even using it...

...

> +	if (instr->delay_ns)

What will happen if you drop this check?

> +		ndelay(instr->delay_ns);

...

> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = mtd_device_unregister(nand_to_mtd(chip));
> +	WARN_ON(ret);

Is this a requirement by MTD to have return value being checked?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko