linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 tty] 8250: microchip: pci1xxxx: Refactor TX Burst code to use pre-existing APIs

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: <254db026-5f9d-497f-ac44-c81d9d5947cf@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 10:26:30 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Rengarajan.S@...rochip.com, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
 gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
 Kumaravel.Thiagarajan@...rochip.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Tharunkumar.Pasumarthi@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 tty] 8250: microchip: pci1xxxx: Refactor TX Burst code
 to use pre-existing APIs

On 23. 02. 24, 10:21, Rengarajan.S@...rochip.com wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-02-23 at 07:08 +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you
>> know the content is safe
>>
>> On 22. 02. 24, 14:49, Rengarajan S wrote:
>>> Updated the TX Burst implementation by changing the circular buffer
>>> processing with the pre-existing APIs in kernel. Also updated
>>> conditional
>>> statements and alignment issues for better readability.
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> so why are you keeping the nested double loop?
>>
> 
> Hi, in order to differentiate Burst mode handling with byte mode had
> seperate loops for both. Since, having single while loop also does not
> align with rx implementation (where we have seperate handling for burst
> and byte) have retained the double loop.

So obviously, align RX to a single loop if possible. The current TX code 
is very hard to follow and sort of unmaintainable (and buggy). And IMO 
it's unnecessary as I proposed [1]. And even if RX cannot be one loop, 
you still can make TX easy to read as the two need not be the same.

[1] 
https://lore.kernel.org/all/b8325c3f-bf5b-4c55-8dce-ef395edce251@kernel.org/

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs