Dear Matthias,
Thanks for the review.
On Thu, 2022-11-10 at 14:12 +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
> On 08/11/2022 20:43, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 06:37:19PM +0100, Matthias Brugger wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 07/11/2022 08:22, Nancy.Lin wrote:
> > > > Simplify code for update mmsys reg.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Nancy.Lin <nancy.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <
> > > > angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: CK Hu <ck.hu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Tested-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <
> > > > angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Tested-by: Bo-Chen Chen <rex-bc.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Nícolas F. R. A. Prado <nfraprado@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c | 45 ++++++++++++--------
> > > > ------------
> > > > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c
> > > > b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c
> > > > index 9a327eb5d9d7..73c8bd27e6ae 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-mmsys.c
> > > > @@ -99,22 +99,27 @@ struct mtk_mmsys {
> > > > struct reset_controller_dev rcdev;
> > > > };
> > > > +static void mtk_mmsys_update_bits(struct mtk_mmsys *mmsys, u32
> > > > offset, u32 mask, u32 val)
> > > > +{
> > > > + u32 tmp;
> > > > +
> > > > + tmp = readl_relaxed(mmsys->regs + offset);
> > > > + tmp = (tmp & ~mask) | (val & mask);
> > >
> > > I'm not sure about the change in the implementation of
> > > mtk_mmsys_update_bits(). Nicolas tried to explain it to me on IRC
> > > but I
> > > wasn't totally convincing. As we have to go for at least another
> > > round of
> > > this patches, I'd like to get a clear understanding while it is
> > > needed that
> > > val bits are set to 1 in the mask.
> >
> > The point here was to make sure that mtk_mmsys_update_bits() didn't
> > allow
> > setting bits outside of the mask, since that's never what you want:
> > the entire
> > point of having a mask is to specify the bits that should be
> > updated (and the
> > ones that should be kept unchanged). So for example if you had
> >
> > mask = 0x0ff0
> > val = 0x00ff
> >
> > the previous implementation would happily overwrite the 4 least
> > significant bits
> > on the destination register, despite them not being present in the
> > mask, which
> > is wrong.
> >
> > This wrong behavior could easily lead to hard to trace bugs as soon
> > as a badly
> > formatted/wrong val is passed and an unrelated bit updated due to
> > the mask being
> > ignored.
> >
> > For reference, _regmap_update_bits() does the same masking of the
> > value [1].
> >
> > That said, given that this function already existed and was just
> > being moved,
> > it would've been cleaner to make this change in a separate commit.
> >
>
> Would have been better, but we can leave it as it.
>
> Regards,
> Matthias
>
Do you mean to keep original one (1), or keep this (2) ?
1. tmp = (tmp & ~mask) | val;
2. tmp = (tmp & ~mask) | (val & mask);
Regards,
Nancy
> > [1]
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/base/regmap/regmap.c*L3122__;Iw!!CTRNKA9wMg0ARbw!xSv5xbY6cv-Mg-1xDGOf3oVZ93uyrcv4tt87DKlx5emjmwufjf2DjION7GiNAaJB$
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Nícolas
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Matthias
> > >
> > > > + writel_relaxed(tmp, mmsys->regs + offset);
> > > > +}
> >
> > [..]
> > > > -static void mtk_mmsys_update_bits(struct mtk_mmsys *mmsys, u32
> > > > offset, u32 mask, u32 val)
> > > > -{
> > > > - u32 tmp;
> > > > -
> > > > - tmp = readl_relaxed(mmsys->regs + offset);
> > > > - tmp = (tmp & ~mask) | val;
> > > > - writel_relaxed(tmp, mmsys->regs + offset);
> > > > -}
> > > > -
> >
> > [..]
>
>
