| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20201130081820.GA4790@kozik-lap>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2020 09:18:20 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon2@...il.com>
Cc: Krzysztof Opasiak <k.opasiak@...sung.com>, linux-nfc@...ts.01.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 3/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: extract the common phy
blocks
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 06:55:10PM +0900, Bongsu Jeon wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 9:49 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
> > This is not a proper wrapping. Wrapping happens on function arguments.
> >
> > > + if (!gpio_is_valid(phy->common.gpio_en))
> > > return -ENODEV;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - phy->gpio_fw_wake = of_get_named_gpio(np, "wake-gpios", 0);
> > > - if (!gpio_is_valid(phy->gpio_fw_wake)) {
> > > + phy->common.gpio_fw_wake = of_get_named_gpio(np, "wake-gpios", 0);
> > > + if (!gpio_is_valid(phy->common.gpio_fw_wake)) {
> > > /* Support also deprecated property */
> > > - phy->gpio_fw_wake = of_get_named_gpio(np, "s3fwrn5,fw-gpios", 0);
> > > - if (!gpio_is_valid(phy->gpio_fw_wake))
> > > + phy->common.gpio_fw_wake =
> > > + of_get_named_gpio(np, "s3fwrn5,fw-gpios", 0);
> > > + if (!gpio_is_valid(phy->common.gpio_fw_wake))
> >
> > The same.
> >
>
> Even though I wrapped this as below, Second line("s3fwrn5,fw-gpios" )
> was over 80 columns.
> Is it okay as below?
> phy->gpio_fw_wake =of_get_named_gpio(np,
>
> "s3fwrn5,fw-gpios",
> 0);
Your email client breaks indentation so I cannot answer. The wrapping - as
explained in CodingStyle - would look like:
phy->common.gpio_fw_wake = of_get_named_gpio(np,
"s3fwrn5,fw-gpios",
0);
It's not a problem if single argument exceeds 80 character.
>
>
> > > return -ENODEV;
> > > }
> > >
> > > @@ -226,8 +184,8 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > if (!phy)
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > >
> > > - mutex_init(&phy->mutex);
> > > - phy->mode = S3FWRN5_MODE_COLD;
> > > + mutex_init(&phy->common.mutex);
> > > + phy->common.mode = S3FWRN5_MODE_COLD;
> > > phy->irq_skip = true;
> > >
> > > phy->i2c_dev = client;
> > > @@ -237,17 +195,19 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > >
> > > - ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&phy->i2c_dev->dev, phy->gpio_en,
> > > - GPIOF_OUT_INIT_HIGH, "s3fwrn5_en");
> > > + ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&phy->i2c_dev->dev, phy->common.gpio_en,
> > > + GPIOF_OUT_INIT_HIGH, "s3fwrn5_en");
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > >
> > > - ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&phy->i2c_dev->dev, phy->gpio_fw_wake,
> > > - GPIOF_OUT_INIT_LOW, "s3fwrn5_fw_wake");
> > > + ret = devm_gpio_request_one(&phy->i2c_dev->dev,
> > > + phy->common.gpio_fw_wake,
> > > + GPIOF_OUT_INIT_LOW, "s3fwrn5_fw_wake");
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > >
> > > - ret = s3fwrn5_probe(&phy->ndev, phy, &phy->i2c_dev->dev, &i2c_phy_ops);
> > > + ret = s3fwrn5_probe(&phy->common.ndev, phy, &phy->i2c_dev->dev,
> > > + &i2c_phy_ops);
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > >
> > > @@ -255,7 +215,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> > > s3fwrn5_i2c_irq_thread_fn, IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH | IRQF_ONESHOT,
> > > S3FWRN5_I2C_DRIVER_NAME, phy);
> > > if (ret)
> > > - s3fwrn5_remove(phy->ndev);
> > > + s3fwrn5_remove(phy->common.ndev);
> > >
> > > return ret;
> > > }
> > > @@ -264,7 +224,7 @@ static int s3fwrn5_i2c_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> > > {
> > > struct s3fwrn5_i2c_phy *phy = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
> > >
> > > - s3fwrn5_remove(phy->ndev);
> > > + s3fwrn5_remove(phy->common.ndev);
> > >
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.c b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..e333764
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> > > +/*
> > > + * Link Layer for Samsung S3FWRN5 NCI based Driver
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2015 Samsung Electrnoics
> > > + * Robert Baldyga <r.baldyga@...sung.com>
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Samsung Electrnoics
> > > + * Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@...sung.com>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include <linux/gpio.h>
> > > +#include <linux/delay.h>
> >
> > You need also mutex.h (it seems original code did not have it but since
> > you move things around it's a new code basically).
> >
> > > +
> > > +#include "s3fwrn5.h"
> > > +#include "phy_common.h"
> > > +
> > > +void s3fwrn5_phy_set_wake(void *phy_id, bool wake)
> > > +{
> > > + struct phy_common *phy = phy_id;
> > > +
> > > + mutex_lock(&phy->mutex);
> > > + gpio_set_value(phy->gpio_fw_wake, wake);
> > > + msleep(S3FWRN5_EN_WAIT_TIME);
> > > + mutex_unlock(&phy->mutex);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +bool s3fwrn5_phy_power_ctrl(struct phy_common *phy, enum s3fwrn5_mode mode)
> > > +{
> > > + if (phy->mode == mode)
> > > + return false;
> > > +
> > > + phy->mode = mode;
> > > +
> > > + gpio_set_value(phy->gpio_en, 1);
> > > + gpio_set_value(phy->gpio_fw_wake, 0);
> > > + if (mode == S3FWRN5_MODE_FW)
> > > + gpio_set_value(phy->gpio_fw_wake, 1);
> > > +
> > > + if (mode != S3FWRN5_MODE_COLD) {
> > > + msleep(S3FWRN5_EN_WAIT_TIME);
> > > + gpio_set_value(phy->gpio_en, 0);
> > > + msleep(S3FWRN5_EN_WAIT_TIME);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return true;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +enum s3fwrn5_mode s3fwrn5_phy_get_mode(void *phy_id)
> > > +{
> > > + struct phy_common *phy = phy_id;
> > > + enum s3fwrn5_mode mode;
> > > +
> > > + mutex_lock(&phy->mutex);
> > > +
> > > + mode = phy->mode;
> > > +
> > > + mutex_unlock(&phy->mutex);
> > > +
> > > + return mode;
> > > +}
> > > diff --git a/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.h b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.h
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..b920f7f
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/drivers/nfc/s3fwrn5/phy_common.h
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
> > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
> > > + *
> > > + * Link Layer for Samsung S3FWRN5 NCI based Driver
> > > + *
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2015 Samsung Electrnoics
> > > + * Robert Baldyga <r.baldyga@...sung.com>
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2020 Samsung Electrnoics
> > > + * Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon@...sung.com>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#ifndef __NFC_S3FWRN5_PHY_COMMON_H
> > > +#define __NFC_S3FWRN5_PHY_COMMON_H
> > > +
> > > +#define S3FWRN5_EN_WAIT_TIME 20
> > > +
> > > +struct phy_common {
> > > + struct nci_dev *ndev;
> >
> > You need a header for nci_dev type.
> >
> > > +
> > > + int gpio_en;
> > > + int gpio_fw_wake;
> > > +
> > > + struct mutex mutex;
> >
> > You need a header include for mutex.
> >
> > > +
> > > + enum s3fwrn5_mode mode;
> >
> > Indeed now it won't work - you use an enum without its declaration. The
> > s3fwrn5_mode enum looks more like a property of the phy and after this
> > patch would be used only once in i2c.c and once in core.c.
> >
>
> Yes. phy_common.h doesn't include nci_dev and mutex and s3fwrn5_mode
> declaration.
> So, i2c.c and phy_common.c include "s3fwrn5.h" first and then "
> ( mutex and nci_dev would be included from nci_core.h and 3fwrn5_mode
> would be included from s3fwrn5.h).
The header usually should include everything which is used inside, so
mutex.
>
> > How is it going to be used in your new driver - I cannot check because
> > you did not post it. You should post this refactoring with new users of
> > the API, so we could see bigger picture.
> >
>
> Okay. Then, I will add the UART driver.
> So, I will resend the patches as below.
> 1. [PATCH net-next 1/4] dt-bindings: net: nfc: s3fwrn5: Support a UART interface
> 2. [PATCH net-next 2/4] nfc: s3fwrn5: reduce the EN_WAIT_TIME (*
> because of Jakub's request )
> 3. [PATCH net-next 3/4] nfc: s3fwrn5: extract the common phy blocks
> 4. [PATCH net-next 4/4] net: nfc: s3fwrn5: Support a UART interface
>
> > Your original idea - with the s3fwrn5.h include here - looks more
> > logical than moving the enum s3fwrn5_mode here.
> >
>
> Do you mean that it would be better to include the s3fwrn5.h in phy_common.h?
Yes.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists