linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] spi: add spi_optimize

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: <CAMknhBGt0EyA_FcpXbmT-PStZqmZ_PUENHbVfgDFOwWcv5gTAw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 13:26:02 -0600
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Martin Sperl <kernel@...tin.sperl.org>, David Jander <david@...tonic.nl>, 
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>, 
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, 
	Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@...s.st.com>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, 
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] spi: add spi_optimize_message() APIs

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:55 PM Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 05:26:41PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
>
> > +static int __spi_optimize_message(struct spi_device *spi,
> > +                               struct spi_message *msg,
> > +                               bool pre_optimized)
> > +{
> > +     struct spi_controller *ctlr = spi->controller;
> > +     int ret;
> > +
> > +     ret = __spi_validate(spi, msg);
> > +     if (ret)
> > +             return ret;
> > +
> > +     if (ctlr->optimize_message) {
> > +             ret = ctlr->optimize_message(msg);
> > +             if (ret)
> > +                     return ret;
> > +     }
> > +
> > +     msg->pre_optimized = pre_optimized;
>
> It would probably be clearer to name the parameter pre_optimising rather
> than pre_optimized, as it is the logic is a bit confusing.  Either that
> or some comments.  A similar issue applies on the cleanup path.

Per Jonathan's suggestion, I plan to remove the parameter from this
function and handle this flag at the call site instead.