linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 04/15] gpio: bd71828: use new line value setter callbacks

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: <475375c9-9d72-4583-a21e-37b17c6b8c46@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 15:20:10 +0200
From: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>,
 Broadcom internal kernel review list
 <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
 Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
 Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
 Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+renesas@...il.com>, Michael Buesch <m@...s.ch>,
 Thomas Richard <thomas.richard@...tlin.com>,
 Eugeniy Paltsev <Eugeniy.Paltsev@...opsys.com>,
 Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>, Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
 Support Opensource <support.opensource@...semi.com>
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev,
 Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/15] gpio: bd71828: use new line value setter callbacks

On 10/03/2025 14:40, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> 
> struct gpio_chip now has callbacks for setting line values that return
> an integer, allowing to indicate failures. Convert the driver to using
> them.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> ---
>   drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c | 15 ++++++---------
>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> index b2ccc320c7b5..4ba151e5cf25 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-bd71828.c
> @@ -16,10 +16,9 @@ struct bd71828_gpio {
>   	struct gpio_chip gpio;
>   };
>   
> -static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> -			     int value)
> +static int bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
> +			    int value)
>   {
> -	int ret;
>   	struct bd71828_gpio *bdgpio = gpiochip_get_data(chip);
>   	u8 val = (value) ? BD71828_GPIO_OUT_HI : BD71828_GPIO_OUT_LO;
>   
> @@ -28,12 +27,10 @@ static void bd71828_gpio_set(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset,
>   	 * we are dealing with - then we are done
>   	 */
>   	if (offset == HALL_GPIO_OFFSET)
> -		return;
> +		return 0;

Should this be -EINVAL (or, can this check be just dropped?) Value of an 
input pin is tried to be set.

>   
> -	ret = regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
> -				 BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
> -	if (ret)
> -		dev_err(bdgpio->dev, "Could not set gpio to %d\n", value);
> +	return regmap_update_bits(bdgpio->regmap, GPIO_OUT_REG(offset),
> +				  BD71828_GPIO_OUT_MASK, val);
>   }
>   
>   static int bd71828_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned int offset)
> @@ -112,7 +109,7 @@ static int bd71828_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   	bdgpio->gpio.set_config = bd71828_gpio_set_config;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.can_sleep = true;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.get = bd71828_gpio_get;
> -	bdgpio->gpio.set = bd71828_gpio_set;
> +	bdgpio->gpio.set_rv = bd71828_gpio_set;
>   	bdgpio->gpio.base = -1;
>   
>   	/*
>