linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/19] media: i2c: ds90ub960: Move all RX port init code into ub960_init_rx

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: <cb989b22-33e3-418e-9f58-676256720aec@ideasonboard.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 15:23:30 +0200
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
To: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Devarsh Thakkar <devarsht@...com>,
 Jai Luthra <jai.luthra@...asonboard.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/19] media: i2c: ds90ub960: Move all RX port init code
 into ub960_init_rx_ports()

Hi,

On 15/01/2025 16:25, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Moi,
> 
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2025 at 11:14:13AM +0200, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
>> We have some code in probe() which is related to RX port initialization,
>> and should be in ub960_init_rx_ports(). Move the code there.
>>
>> We also move ub960_reset() so that it is accessible from
>> ub960_init_rx_ports().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...asonboard.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c | 115 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>>   1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
>> index 02e22ae813fa..cc944d737524 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
>> @@ -1225,6 +1225,33 @@ static int ub960_ind_update_bits(struct ub960_data *priv, u8 block, u8 reg,
>>   	return ret;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static int ub960_reset(struct ub960_data *priv, bool reset_regs)
>> +{
>> +	struct device *dev = &priv->client->dev;
>> +	unsigned int v;
>> +	int ret;
>> +	u8 bit;
>> +
>> +	bit = reset_regs ? UB960_SR_RESET_DIGITAL_RESET1 :
>> +			   UB960_SR_RESET_DIGITAL_RESET0;
>> +
>> +	ret = ub960_write(priv, UB960_SR_RESET, bit, NULL);
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		return ret;
> 
> Not related to the patch but if you're serialising things below, why aren't
> you doing that here?

ub960_write() takes the lock, regmap_read_poll_timeout() doesn't.

  Tomi

> 
>> +
>> +	mutex_lock(&priv->reg_lock);
>> +
>> +	ret = regmap_read_poll_timeout(priv->regmap, UB960_SR_RESET, v,
>> +				       (v & bit) == 0, 2000, 100000);
>> +
>> +	mutex_unlock(&priv->reg_lock);
>> +
>> +	if (ret)
>> +		dev_err(dev, "reset failed: %d\n", ret);
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>