| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID:
<AM6PR04MB59416E3C8FFC904450F3B02D88D02@AM6PR04MB5941.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:33:53 +0000
From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>,
Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>
CC: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>, Michael Turquette
<mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] of: property: add of_property_for_each_u64
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] of: property: add of_property_for_each_u64
>
> +Luca
>
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 08:36:39PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> >
> > Preparing for assigned-clock-rates-u64 support, add function
> > of_property_for_each_u64 to iterate each u64 value
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > ---
> > drivers/of/property.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/of.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/property.c b/drivers/of/property.c index
> > 164d77cb9445..b89c3ab01d44 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/property.c
> > +++ b/drivers/of/property.c
> > @@ -548,6 +548,29 @@ const __be32 *of_prop_next_u32(struct
> property
> > *prop, const __be32 *cur, }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_prop_next_u32);
> >
> > +const __be32 *of_prop_next_u64(struct property *prop, const
> __be32 *cur,
> > + u64 *pu)
>
> struct property can be const
Fix in v2. BTW, I am thinking something as below:
const __be64 *of_prop_next_u64(const struct property *prop, const __be64 *cur,
u64 *pu)
{
const void *curv = cur;
if (!prop)
return NULL;
if (!cur) {
curv = prop->value;
goto out_val;
}
curv += sizeof(*cur);
if (curv >= prop->value + prop->length)
return NULL;
out_val:
*pu = be64_to_cpup(curv);
return curv;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_prop_next_u64);
>
> > +{
> > + const void *curv = cur;
> > +
> > + if (!prop)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + if (!cur) {
> > + curv = prop->value;
> > + goto out_val;
> > + }
> > +
> > + curv += sizeof(*cur) * 2;
> > + if (curv >= prop->value + prop->length)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > +out_val:
> > + *pu = of_read_number(curv, 2);
> > + return curv;
> > +}
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_prop_next_u64);
> > +
> > const char *of_prop_next_string(struct property *prop, const char
> > *cur) {
> > const void *curv = cur;
> > diff --git a/include/linux/of.h b/include/linux/of.h index
> > 13cf7a43b473..464eca6a4636 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/of.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/of.h
> > @@ -439,6 +439,18 @@ extern int of_detach_node(struct
> device_node *);
> > */
> > const __be32 *of_prop_next_u32(struct property *prop, const
> __be32 *cur,
> > u32 *pu);
> > +
> > +/*
> > + * struct property *prop;
> > + * const __be32 *p;
> > + * u64 u;
> > + *
> > + * of_property_for_each_u64(np, "propname", prop, p, u)
> > + * printk("U64 value: %llx\n", u);
> > + */
> > +const __be32 *of_prop_next_u64(struct property *prop, const
> __be32 *cur,
> > + u64 *pu);
> > +
> > /*
> > * struct property *prop;
> > * const char *s;
> > @@ -834,6 +846,12 @@ static inline const __be32
> *of_prop_next_u32(struct property *prop,
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline const __be32 *of_prop_next_u64(struct property *prop,
> > + const __be32 *cur, u64 *pu)
> > +{
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline const char *of_prop_next_string(struct property *prop,
> > const char *cur)
> > {
> > @@ -1437,6 +1455,12 @@ static inline int
> of_property_read_s32(const struct device_node *np,
> > p; \
> > p = of_prop_next_u32(prop, p, &u))
> >
> > +#define of_property_for_each_u64(np, propname, prop, p, u) \
> > + for (prop = of_find_property(np, propname, NULL), \
> > + p = of_prop_next_u64(prop, NULL, &u); \
> > + p; \
> > + p = of_prop_next_u64(prop, p, &u))
>
> I think we want to define this differently to avoid exposing struct
> property and the property data directly. Like this:
>
> #define of_property_for_each_u64(np, propname, u) \
> for (struct property *_prop = of_find_property(np, propname, NULL),
> const __be32 *_p = of_prop_next_u64(_prop, NULL, &u);
> _p;
> _p = of_prop_next_u64(_prop, _p, &u))
>
Sure, I will fix in v2.
Thanks,
Peng.
> See this discussion for context[1].
>
> Rob
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240624232122.3cfe03f8@booty/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists