linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] pinctrl: spacemit: k3: add initial pin support

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

Message-ID: <B34F6DA41EF01479+aUnqtjkWf1sVJbmD@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 09:04:54 +0800
From: Troy Mitchell <troy.mitchell@...ux.spacemit.com>
To: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>,
	Troy Mitchell <troy.mitchell@...ux.spacemit.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
	spacemit@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/3] pinctrl: spacemit: k3: add initial pin support

On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 07:03:38AM +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> Hi Troy,
> 
> On 14:59 Mon 22 Dec     , Troy Mitchell wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 20, 2025 at 06:14:54PM +0800, Yixun Lan wrote:
> > > For the pinctrl IP of SpacemiT's K3 SoC, it has different register offset
> > > comparing with previous SoC generation, so introduce a function to do the
> > > pin to offset mapping. Also add all the pinctrl data.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Yixun Lan <dlan@...too.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/Kconfig      |   4 +-
> > >  drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c | 354 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > >  2 files changed, 352 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > [...]
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c b/drivers/pinctrl/spacemit/pinctrl-k1.c
> > [...]
> > > +static unsigned int spacemit_k3_pin_to_offset(unsigned int pin)
> > > +{
> > > +	unsigned int offset = pin > 130 ? (pin + 2) : pin;
> > Is this necessary? I think it's hard to read. Why not:
> > ```
> > if (pin > 130)
> >   pin += 2;
> > 
> > return pin << 2;
> > ```
> > This avoids the extra variable and makes the code clearer.
> > > +
> > > +	return offset << 2;
> No, I do not want to change, it's pretty much a personal taste here,
> I did similar as k1_pin_to_offset(), explicitly introduce a variable offset
> to let reader know it convert from pin to offsett, which is more readable..
This is a minor issue. both styles are acceptable to me.

                        - Troy
> 
> -- 
> Yixun Lan (dlan)
>