On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 06:34:39AM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 01:38:09AM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 10:43:47PM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 01:26:58PM +0100, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > >
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > > > +static int alvium_get_host_supp_csi_lanes(struct alvium_dev *alvium)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + u64 val;
> > > > > > + int ret = 0;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + alvium_read(alvium, REG_BCRM_CSI2_LANE_COUNT_RW, &val, &ret);
> > > > >
> > > > > Missing error checking before the use of the value. The same pattern
> > > > > remains prevalent throughout the driver.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think it'd be easier if you didn't use a temporary variable for reading,
> > > > > but instead had a register width specific access function. You could even
> > > > > introduce a helper macro to read this information as I suggested in an
> > > > > earlier review.
> > > >
> > > > oks.
> > > > We are moving to use the following macros:
> > > >
> > > > #define alvium_read_check(alvium, reg, value) \
> > > > { \
> > > > int ret = alvium_read(alvium, reg, value, NULL); \
> > > > if (ret) \
> > > > return ret; \
> > > > }
> > > >
> > >
> > > You could do something like (entirely untested):
> > >
> > > #define ALVIUM_DECLARE_READ(sign, bits) \
> > > static int
> > > alvium_read_ ## sign ## bits(struct alvium_dev *alvium, u32 reg, \
> > > sign ## bits *val, int *err) \
> > > { \
> > > u64 val64; \
> > > int ret; \
> > > \
> > > if (err && *err < 0) \
> > > return *err; \
> > > \
> > > alvium_read(alvium, reg, &val64, &ret); \
> > > if (ret < 0) { \
> > > if (err) \
> > > *err = ret; \
> > > return ret; \
> > > } \
> > > \
> > > *val = val64; \
> > > \
> > > return 0; \
> > > }
> > >
> > > ALVIUM_DECLARE_READ(u, 32);
> > >
> > > And then, e.g. instead of (and failing to check ret):
> > >
> > > u64 val;
> > >
> > > alvium_read(alvium, REG_BCRM_CONTRAST_VALUE_RW, &val, &ret);
> > > alvium->dft_contrast = val;
> > >
> > > you'd have a single call:
> > >
> > > alvium_read_u32(alvium, REG_BCRM_CONTRAST_VALUE_RW,
> > > &alvium->dft_contrast, &ret);
> > >
> > > And so on.
> > >
> > > You can drop sign if you don't need signed reads but some of the struct
> > > fields you're writing something appear to be signed.
> > >
> > > It'd be good to check the register size matches with the size of *val, too.
> > > Maybe something like:
> > >
> > > WARN_ON((CCI_REG ## bits(0) && CCI_REG_WIDTH_MASK) >> CCI_REG_WIDTH_SHIFT
> > > != sizeof(sign ## bits));
> >
> > I think this could actually be automated, and implemented in v4l2-cci.
> > Something like the following:
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-cci.c b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-cci.c
> > index bc2dbec019b0..27f1eaa7777d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-cci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-cci.c
> > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@
> >
> > #include <media/v4l2-cci.h>
> >
> > -int cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 *val, int *err)
> > +int __cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, void *val, int *err)
> > {
> > unsigned int len;
> > u8 buf[8];
> > @@ -37,19 +37,19 @@ int cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 *val, int *err)
> >
> > switch (len) {
> > case 1:
> > - *val = buf[0];
> > + *(u8 *)val = buf[0];
> > break;
> > case 2:
> > - *val = get_unaligned_be16(buf);
> > + *(u16 *)val = get_unaligned_be16(buf);
> > break;
> > case 3:
> > - *val = get_unaligned_be24(buf);
> > + *(u32 *)val = get_unaligned_be24(buf);
> > break;
> > case 4:
> > - *val = get_unaligned_be32(buf);
> > + *(u32 *)val = get_unaligned_be32(buf);
> > break;
> > case 8:
> > - *val = get_unaligned_be64(buf);
> > + *(u64 *)val = get_unaligned_be64(buf);
> > break;
> > default:
> > dev_err(regmap_get_device(map), "Error invalid reg-width %u for reg 0x%04x\n",
> > @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ int cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 *val, int *err)
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(cci_read);
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__cci_read);
> >
> > int cci_write(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 val, int *err)
> > {
> > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ int cci_update_bits(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 mask, u64 val, int *err)
> > u64 readval;
> > int ret;
> >
> > - ret = cci_read(map, reg, &readval, err);
> > + ret = __cci_read(map, reg, &readval, err);
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> > diff --git a/include/media/v4l2-cci.h b/include/media/v4l2-cci.h
> > index 0f6803e4b17e..31223ce8d741 100644
> > --- a/include/media/v4l2-cci.h
> > +++ b/include/media/v4l2-cci.h
> > @@ -7,6 +7,9 @@
> > #ifndef _V4L2_CCI_H
> > #define _V4L2_CCI_H
> >
> > +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
> > +#include <linux/build_bug.h>
> > +#include <linux/log2.h>
> > #include <linux/types.h>
> >
> > struct i2c_client;
> > @@ -39,6 +42,8 @@ struct cci_reg_sequence {
> > #define CCI_REG32(x) ((4 << CCI_REG_WIDTH_SHIFT) | (x))
> > #define CCI_REG64(x) ((8 << CCI_REG_WIDTH_SHIFT) | (x))
> >
> > +int __cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, void *val, int *err);
> > +
> > /**
> > * cci_read() - Read a value from a single CCI register
> > *
> > @@ -48,9 +53,17 @@ struct cci_reg_sequence {
> > * @err: Optional pointer to store errors, if a previous error is set
> > * then the read will be skipped
> > *
> > + * The type of the @val pointer must match the size of the register being read.
> > + * Mismatches will result in compile-time errors.
> > + *
> > * Return: %0 on success or a negative error code on failure.
> > */
> > -int cci_read(struct regmap *map, u32 reg, u64 *val, int *err);
> > +#define cci_read(map, reg, val, err) ({ \
> > + u32 __reg = (reg); \
> > + u32 __size = FIELD_GET(CCI_REG_WIDTH_MASK, __reg); \
> > + BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(*(val)) != roundup_pow_of_two(__size)); \
> > + __cci_read(map, __reg, (void *)(val), err); \
> > +})
> >
> > /**
> > * cci_write() - Write a value to a single CCI register
> >
> > The change to cci_update_bits() is obviously wrong, I've hacked that to
> > compile-test the rest with the drivers using cci_read(), and I get nice
> > build-time errors due to usage of the wrong type :-)
> >
> > Is this something that would be considered ? Bonus points to anyone who
> > would fix cci_update_bits() :-)
>
> I like the idea of moving this to v4l2-cci.
>
> I'd prefer _Generic() based solution as we'd have exact types there instead
> of just size. E.g. with the above code, reading a value to a long variable
> would work on some archs but fail on others.
Doesn't _Generic() treat compatible types identically ?
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
