netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 08/24] wfx: add bus

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: <CAPDyKFoXgV3m-rMKfjqRj91PNjOGaWg6odWG-EGdFKkL+dGWoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Mar 2021 15:11:56 +0100
From:   Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To:     Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        driverdevel <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pali Rohár <pali@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/24] wfx: add bus_sdio.c

On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 at 18:14, Jérôme Pouiller
<jerome.pouiller@...abs.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Ulf,
>
> On Monday 22 March 2021 13:20:35 CET Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 at 14:25, Jerome Pouiller
> > <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/bus_sdio.c | 259 +++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  1 file changed, 259 insertions(+)
> > >  create mode 100644 drivers/net/wireless/silabs/wfx/bus_sdio.c
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > +static const struct sdio_device_id wfx_sdio_ids[] = {
> > > +       { SDIO_DEVICE(SDIO_VENDOR_ID_SILABS, SDIO_DEVICE_ID_SILABS_WF200) },
> > > +       { },
> > > +};
> > > +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(sdio, wfx_sdio_ids);
> > > +
> > > +struct sdio_driver wfx_sdio_driver = {
> > > +       .name = "wfx-sdio",
> > > +       .id_table = wfx_sdio_ids,
> > > +       .probe = wfx_sdio_probe,
> > > +       .remove = wfx_sdio_remove,
> > > +       .drv = {
> > > +               .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> > > +               .of_match_table = wfx_sdio_of_match,
> >
> > It's not mandatory to support power management, like system
> > suspend/resume. However, as this looks like this is a driver for an
> > embedded SDIO device, you probably want this.
> >
> > If that is the case, please assign the dev_pm_ops here and implement
> > the ->suspend|resume() callbacks.
>
> I have no platform to test suspend/resume, so I have only a
> theoretical understanding of this subject.

I see.

>
> I understanding is that with the current implementation, the
> device will be powered off on suspend and then totally reset
> (including reloading of the firmware) on resume. I am wrong?

You are correct, for a *removable* SDIO card. In this case, the
mmc/sdio core will remove the corresponding SDIO card/device and its
corresponding SDIO func devices at system suspend. It will then be
redetected at system resume (and the SDIO func driver re-probed).

Although, as this is an embedded SDIO device, per definition it's not
a removable card (MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE should be set for the
corresponding mmc host), the SDIO card will stick around and instead
the ->suspend|resume() callback needs to be implemented for the SDIO
func driver.

>
> This behavior sounds correct to me. You would expect something
> more?

Yes, see above.

Kind regards
Uffe