Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On 4/5/22 02:37, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> +int rpmb_get_write_count(struct rpmb_dev *rdev, int len, u8 *request, int rlen, u8 *resp)
>> +{
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + if (!rdev)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&rdev->lock);
>> + err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + if (rdev->ops && rdev->ops->get_write_count)
>> + err = rdev->ops->get_write_count(rdev->dev.parent, rdev->target,
>> + len, request, rlen, resp);
>> + mutex_unlock(&rdev->lock);
>> +
>> + return err;
>> +}
>
> The names rpmb_get_write_count() and get_write_count() look confusing
> to me since these functions query the write counter. How about adding
> "er" at the end of both function names?
>
> Are there any plans to add an implementation of struct rpmb_ops for
> UFS devices?
Not by me but I agree it would be a useful exercise to see if a unified
API makes sense.
--
Alex Bennée
