linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 06/23] mailbox: Allow controller specific mapping using fwnode

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: <aEc7vogHjBKP1anJ@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2025 22:53:34 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Sunil V L <sunilvl@...tanamicro.com>,
	Rahul Pathak <rpathak@...tanamicro.com>,
	Leyfoon Tan <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>,
	Atish Patra <atish.patra@...ux.dev>,
	Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
	Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/23] mailbox: Allow controller specific mapping
 using fwnode

On Mon, Jun 09, 2025 at 02:40:32PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 5:11 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, May 25, 2025 at 02:16:53PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:

...

> > >  struct mbox_chan *mbox_request_channel(struct mbox_client *cl, int index)
> > >  {
> > > +     struct fwnode_reference_args fwspec;
> >
> > + property.h (if not done yet)
> 
> This needs fwnode.h

No, it needs property.h. Please, read the note at the top of fwnode.h why.

...

> > > -     int ret;
> > > +     int i, ret;
> >
> > Why is 'i' signed?
> 
> No particular reason because 'i' is not being assigned a negative
>>  value so both signed and unsigned will work fine.

Besides, splitting will make it easier to check and work on as being less
intrusive change.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko