linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/60] i2c: cp2615: reword according to newest specification

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <188d9071-01f5-4e81-9427-5b8397864211@sch.bme.hu>
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2024 17:07:56 +0200
From: Bence Csókás <bence98@....bme.hu>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Bence Csókás <bence98@....bme.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/60] i2c: cp2615: reword according to newest
 specification

Hi!

On 2024. 07. 06. 13:20, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Change the wording of this driver wrt. the newest I2C v7 and SMBus 3.2
> specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
> ---
>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cp2615.c | 8 ++++----
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cp2615.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cp2615.c
> index cf3747d87034..315a37155401 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cp2615.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cp2615.c
> @@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ enum cp2615_i2c_status {
>   	CP2615_CFG_LOCKED = -6,
>   	/* read_len or write_len out of range */
>   	CP2615_INVALID_PARAM = -4,
> -	/* I2C slave did not ACK in time */
> +	/* I2C target did not ACK in time */
>   	CP2615_TIMEOUT,
>   	/* I2C bus busy */
>   	CP2615_BUS_BUSY,

The diff is cut short, but here would be the comment for the next enum 
element, CP2615_BUS_ERROR, which reads:
 > /* I2C bus error (ie. device NAK'd the request) */
If you're going for consistency, you might want to edit that as well.

> @@ -211,7 +211,7 @@ static int cp2615_check_iop(struct usb_interface *usbif)
>   }
>   
>   static int
> -cp2615_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
> +cp2615_i2c_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
>   {
>   	struct usb_interface *usbif = adap->algo_data;
>   	int i = 0, ret = 0;
> @@ -250,8 +250,8 @@ cp2615_i2c_func(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>   }
>   
>   static const struct i2c_algorithm cp2615_i2c_algo = {
> -	.master_xfer	= cp2615_i2c_master_xfer,
> -	.functionality	= cp2615_i2c_func,
> +	.xfer = cp2615_i2c_xfer,
> +	.functionality = cp2615_i2c_func,
>   };
>   
>   /*

I don't understand the need for the whitespace changes.

Anyways, these are just minor things I could live with.

Reviewed-by: Bence Csókás <bence98@....bme.hu>

Bence