linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] iio: dac: adi-axi-dac: use unique bus free check

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: <udqm2qkw3yrewmovua54twfzbsfduojc5f5uoj4nptxldpbbr5@75bb2pldwq7f>
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2025 16:32:57 +0200
From: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@...libre.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>
Cc: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, 
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, 
	David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] iio: dac: adi-axi-dac: use unique bus free check

Hi Andy,

sorry, seen this message now only, for some reason sometimes your emails
goes to the spam. Now i marked all as "not spam", let's see.

On 09.04.2025 19:51, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 11:16:55AM +0200, Angelo Dureghello wrote:
> > From: Angelo Dureghello <adureghello@...libre.com>
> > 
> > Use a unique function for the bus free check by polling, to reduce
> > duplicated code. An error is always thrown in case of timeout.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +static int axi_dac_wait_bus_free(struct axi_dac_state *st)
> > +{
> > +	u32 val;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_read_poll_timeout(st->regmap, AXI_DAC_UI_STATUS_REG, val,
> > +		FIELD_GET(AXI_DAC_UI_STATUS_IF_BUSY, val) == -1, 10,
> > +		100 * KILO);
> 
> Same comment as in the previous patch. Okay, it seems more than in the single
> case. Perhaps to change that as well here?
> 

for my personal taste would not use more specific named defines here,
would not change this, in case we can send a separate patch to fix
them all. 

> > +	if (ret == -ETIMEDOUT)
> > +		dev_err(st->dev, "AXI bus timeout\n");
> 
> Why do you need this? The error code will go to the user space at the end? If
> yes, it will be enough to have it printed there, no?
> 

This warning means something very bad happen at AXI level. I never seen
this warning issued, but it may help to debug AXI/HDL issues, would not 
remove it. 

> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> 
> 
> -- 
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
> 
> 
Regards,
angelo