linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 10/17] pinctrl: eyeq5: add platform 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 17:55:42 +0100
From: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@...tlin.com>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>, "Gregory
 CLEMENT" <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>, "Michael Turquette"
 <mturquette@...libre.com>, "Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@...nel.org>, "Rob Herring"
 <robh+dt@...nel.org>, "Krzysztof Kozlowski"
 <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, "Conor Dooley" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>, "Linus Walleij"
 <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Rafał Miłecki
 <rafal@...ecki.pl>, "Philipp Zabel" <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: "Vladimir Kondratiev" <vladimir.kondratiev@...ileye.com>,
 <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
 <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Thomas
 Petazzoni" <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, "Tawfik Bayouk"
 <tawfik.bayouk@...ileye.com>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/17] pinctrl: eyeq5: add platform driver

Hello,

On Wed Jan 24, 2024 at 8:03 AM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/01/2024 19:46, Théo Lebrun wrote:
> > Add the Mobileye EyeQ5 pin controller driver. It might grow to add later
> > support of other platforms from Mobileye. It belongs to a syscon region
> > called OLB.
> > 
> > Existing pins and their function live statically in the driver code
> > rather than in the devicetree, see compatible match data.
> > 
>
> ...
>
> > +static int eq5p_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> > +	struct device_node *parent_np = of_get_parent(np);
> > +	const struct eq5p_match *match = of_device_get_match_data(dev);
> > +	struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev;
> > +	struct eq5p_pinctrl *pctrl;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	pctrl = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*pctrl), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +	if (!pctrl)
> > +		return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +	pctrl->olb = ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> > +	if (parent_np)
> > +		pctrl->olb = syscon_node_to_regmap(parent_np);
> > +	if (IS_ERR(pctrl->olb))
> > +		pctrl->olb = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "mobileye,olb");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(pctrl->olb))
> > +		return PTR_ERR(pctrl->olb);
>
> No, we talked about this, you got comments on this. There is no
> mobileye,olb. You cannot have undocumented properties.

Clearly and I fully agree. It's a versioning issue on my side. It's
been fixed (again, oops).

>
> > +
> > +	pctrl->regs = match->regs;
> > +	pctrl->funcs = match->funcs;
> > +	pctrl->nfuncs = match->nfuncs;
> > +
> > +	pctrl->desc.name = dev_name(dev);
> > +	pctrl->desc.pins = match->pins;
> > +	pctrl->desc.npins = match->npins;
> > +	pctrl->desc.pctlops = &eq5p_pinctrl_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.pmxops = &eq5p_pinmux_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.confops = &eq5p_pinconf_ops;
> > +	pctrl->desc.owner = THIS_MODULE;
> > +
> > +	ret = devm_pinctrl_register_and_init(dev, &pctrl->desc, pctrl, &pctldev);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "Failed registering pinctrl device: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	ret = pinctrl_enable(pctldev);
> > +	if (ret) {
> > +		dev_err(dev, "Failed enabling pinctrl device: %d\n", ret);
> > +		return ret;
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	dev_info(dev, "probed\n");
>
> I am pretty sure you got comments for these. Drop such debugs from all
> of your code. Current and future.

Same thing, it must have been lost in the same fixup patch as the
previous mistake.

[...]

> > +static struct platform_driver eq5p_driver = {
> > +	.driver = {
> > +		.name = "eyeq5-pinctrl",
> > +		.of_match_table = eq5p_match,
> > +	},
> > +	.probe = eq5p_probe,
> > +};
> > +
> > +static int __init eq5p_init(void)
> > +{
> > +	return platform_driver_register(&eq5p_driver);
> > +}
> > +core_initcall(eq5p_init);
>
> No, pins are not a core_initcall. This could be arch_initcall, but
> considering you depend on the parent this must be module driver.
>
> Even from this dependency point of view your initcalls are totally wrong
> and will lead to issues.

Same as reset: moved to using the builtin_platform_driver() macro. No
need for it to be module as it cannot be one.

Thanks,

--
Théo Lebrun, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com