linux-kernel - Re:Re: Re: [PATCH] phy: rockchip: usbdp: Check these parameters only when the corresponding set flags are set

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5382b861.a48b.1958527c4dd.Coremail.andyshrk@163.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 20:22:10 +0800 (CST)
From: "Andy Yan" <andyshrk@....com>
To: "Vinod Koul" <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc: heiko@...ech.de, kishon@...nel.org, sebastian.reichel@...labora.com,
	yubing.zhang@...k-chips.com, dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org,
	frank.wang@...k-chips.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	"Andy Yan" <andy.yan@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re:Re: Re: [PATCH] phy: rockchip: usbdp: Check these parameters
 only when the corresponding set flags are set



Hi Vinod,
At 2025-03-11 19:13:46, "Vinod Koul" <vkoul@...nel.org> wrote:
>On 11-03-25, 08:52, Andy Yan wrote:
>
>> Do you mean we should do it like this:
>> 
>> static int rk_udphy_dp_phy_configure(struct phy *phy,
>>                                      union phy_configure_opts *opts)
>> {
>>         struct rk_udphy *udphy = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>>         struct phy_configure_opts_dp *dp = &opts->dp;
>>         u32 i, val, lane;
>>         int ret;
>> 
>>        .............
>>       if (dp->set_rate)
>>            	ret = rk_udphy_dp_phy_verify_link_rate(dp->link_rate);
>>      if (dp->set_lanes)
>>                 ret = rk_udphy_dp_phy_verify_link_lanes(dp->lanes);
>>      if (dp->set_voltates)
>>                ret = rk_udphy_dp_phy_verify_link_voltate(dp->voltate);
>> 
>> 
>> Add helper for each of them ?
>
>That would look better for sure

I will do as that in V2.

Thanks

>
>-- 
>~Vinod