linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] bus: ts-nbus: use gpiod_multi_set_value

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: <b1459947-18ec-4835-8891-5251d8f8c95e@baylibre.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 09:23:56 -0600
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
 Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
 Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
 Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
 Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
 Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
 Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Russell King
 <linux@...linux.org.uk>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
 Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Nuno Sá
 <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
 Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] bus: ts-nbus: use gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep

On 2/7/25 6:17 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> +Yury.
> 
> On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 2:15 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 7, 2025 at 12:48 AM David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com> wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>  static void ts_nbus_write_byte(struct ts_nbus *ts_nbus, u8 byte)
>>>  {
>>> -       struct gpio_descs *gpios = ts_nbus->data;
>>>         DECLARE_BITMAP(values, 8);
>>>
>>>         values[0] = byte;
>>>
>>> -       gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(8, gpios->desc, gpios->info, values);
>>> +       gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep(ts_nbus->data, values);
>>
>> As I said before, this is buggy code on BE64. Needs to be fixed.
> 
> Or isn't? Do we have a test case in bitmap for such a case?
> 
>>>  }
> 
> 

Maybe not the best style, but I don't think it is buggy. Bitmaps are always
handled in long-sized chunks and not cast to bytes so endianness doesn't affect
it. I didn't see an explicit test, but bitmap_read() and bitmap_write() use
array access like this so indirectly it is being tested.