linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] hwmon: Add Qualcomm PMIC BCL hardware monitor driver

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: <20260206-garrulous-lilac-porcupine-083b08@quoll>
Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2026 09:12:50 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi <manaf.pallikunhi@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, 
	amit.kucheria@....qualcomm.com, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, 
	Gaurav Kohli <gaurav.kohli@....qualcomm.com>, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] hwmon: Add Qualcomm PMIC BCL hardware monitor driver

On Fri, Feb 06, 2026 at 02:44:06AM +0530, Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi wrote:
> +	bcl->hwmon_dev = devm_hwmon_device_register_with_info(&pdev->dev,
> +							      bcl->hwmon_name,
> +							      bcl,
> +							      &bcl_hwmon_chip_info,
> +							      NULL);
> +	if (IS_ERR(bcl->hwmon_dev)) {
> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to register hwmon device: %ld\n",
> +			PTR_ERR(bcl->hwmon_dev));
> +		return PTR_ERR(bcl->hwmon_dev);
> +	}
> +
> +	dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "BCL hwmon device with version: %u.%u registered\n",
> +		bcl_get_version_major(bcl), bcl_get_version_minor(bcl));
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static const struct of_device_id bcl_match[] = {
> +	{
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v1",
> +		.data = &pm7250b_data,

And that's the proof that your binding is just repeating downstream
bollocks pattern. Something like "v1" does not exist if you even here
claim this is not "v1", but pm7250.

> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v2",
> +		.data = &pm8350_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v3-bmx",
> +		.data = &pm8550b_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v3-wb",
> +		.data = &pmw5100_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v3-core",
> +		.data = &pm8550_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v4-bmx",
> +		.data = &pmih010_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v4-wb",
> +		.data = &pmw6100_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v4-core",
> +		.data = &pmh010_data,
> +	}, {
> +		.compatible = "qcom,bcl-v4-pmv010",
> +		.data = &pmv010_data,
> +	},
> +	{ }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, bcl_match);
> +
> +static struct platform_driver bcl_driver = {
> +	.probe	= bcl_probe,
> +	.driver	= {
> +		.name		= BCL_DRIVER_NAME,

No, just use name here.

> +		.of_match_table	= bcl_match,
> +	},
> +};
> +
> +MODULE_AUTHOR("Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi <manaf.pallikunhi@....qualcomm.com>");
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("QCOM BCL HWMON driver");
> +module_platform_driver(bcl_driver);
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");

...

> +
> +/**
> + * bcl_disable_irq - Generic helper to disable alarm irq
> + * @alarm: BCL level alarm data
> + */
> +static inline void bcl_disable_irq(struct bcl_alarm_data *alarm)

Why do you write actual functions/code in the headers?

Please follow standard C rules, which mean that the C unit contains code
intended for execution. Headers are only for declarations.

> +{
> +	if (!alarm->irq_enabled)
> +		return;
> +	alarm->irq_enabled = false;
> +	disable_irq_nosync(alarm->irq);
> +	disable_irq_wake(alarm->irq);
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* __QCOM_BCL_HWMON_H__ */
> 
> -- 
> 2.43.0
>