linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 17/17] spi: s3c64xx: use bitfield access macros

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]

Message-ID: <CAPLW+4nN--gG9XsOu6a-mo5vcM-GycRrhPQFOtNidfVTM=KonQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2024 21:38:31 -0600
From: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
To: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
Cc: broonie@...nel.org, andi.shyti@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org, 
	alim.akhtar@...sung.com, jassi.brar@...sung.com, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andre.draszik@...aro.org, 
	peter.griffin@...aro.org, kernel-team@...roid.com, willmcvicker@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 17/17] spi: s3c64xx: use bitfield access macros

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 9:23 PM Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aroorg> wrote:
>
> Hi, Sam,
>
> Thanks for the review feedback!
>
> On 1/26/24 20:12, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> >> -               val |= S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_HALFWORD;
> >> -               val |= S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_HALFWORD;
> >> +               val |= FIELD_PREP(S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_MASK,
> >> +                                 S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_BUS_TSZ_HALFWORD) |
> >> +                      FIELD_PREP(S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_MASK,
> >> +                                 S3C64XX_SPI_MODE_CH_TSZ_HALFWORD);
> > Two people complained it makes the code harder to read. Yet it's not
> > addressed in v3. Please see my comments for your previous submission
> > explaining what can be done, and also Andi's comment on that matter.
>
> I kept these intentionally. Please read my reply on that matter or the
> cover letter to this patch set.
>

I read it. But still don't like it :) I'm sure it's possible to do
this modification, but at the same time keep the code clean an easy to
read. The code above -- I don't like at all, sorry. It was much better
before this patch, IMHO.

> > Also I think new patch series are being submitted a bit too fast,
> > people might not have enough time to provide the review.
>
> This patch set contains patches that are already reviewed or too simple
> to being lagged.
>

Ok, agreed.

> Cheers,
> ta