linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 5/9] phy: qcom-qmp-ufs: Remove qmp_ufs_com

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: <w2fuv2xnvszlbwdlxvakkex6sce2mm32uslft5ma2zvz2gscvd@chgzsflkgxvs>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 16:34:55 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
To: Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com>
Cc: vkoul@...nel.org, kishon@...nel.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
        James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        bvanassche@....org, bjorande@...cinc.com, neil.armstrong@...aro.org,
        konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com, quic_rdwivedi@...cinc.com,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 5/9] phy: qcom-qmp-ufs: Remove qmp_ufs_com_init()

On Sun, Apr 20, 2025 at 01:38:40AM +0530, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/14/2025 1:13 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 12:58:48PM +0530, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 4/11/2025 4:26 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 at 13:42, Nitin Rawat <quic_nitirawa@...cinc.com> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 4/11/2025 1:39 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 02:30:58PM +0530, Nitin Rawat wrote:
> > > > > > > Simplify the qcom ufs phy driver by inlining qmp_ufs_com_init() into
> > > > > > > qmp_ufs_power_on(). This change removes unnecessary function calls and
> > > > > > > ensures that the initialization logic is directly within the power-on
> > > > > > > routine, maintaining the same functionality.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Which problem is this patch trying to solve?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Dmitry,
> > > > > 
> > > > > As part of the patch, I simplified the code by moving qmp_ufs_com_init
> > > > > inline to qmp_ufs_power_on, since qmp_ufs_power_on was merely calling
> > > > > qmp_ufs_com_init. This change eliminates unnecessary function call.
> > > > 
> > > > You again are describing what you did. Please start by stating the
> > > > problem or the issue.
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > Hi Dmitry,
> > > 
> > > Sure, will update the commit with "problem" first in the next patchset when
> > > I post.
> > 
> > Before posting the next iteration, maybe you can respond inline? It well
> > might be that there is no problem to solve.a
> 
> Hi Dmitry,
> 
> Apologies for late reply , I just realized I missed responding to your
> comment on this patch.
> 
> 
> There is no functional "problem" here.
> ===================================================================
> The qmp_ufs_power_on() function acts as a wrapper, solely invoking
> qmp_ufs_com_init(). Additionally, the code within qmp_ufs_com_init() does
> not correspond well with its name.
> 
> Therefore, to enhance the readability and eliminate unnecessary function
> call inline qmp_ufs_com_init() into qmp_ufs_power_on().
> 
> There is no change to the functionality.
> ==================================================================
> 
> 
> I agree with you that there isn't a significant issue here. If you insist,
> I'm okay with skipping this patch. Let me know your thoughts.


Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>



-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry