All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
Cc: linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, t-kristo@ti.com, nsekhar@ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2]  pinctrl: pinctrl-single: Fix pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry to use __ffs than ffs
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:02:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160414160229.GK5995@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460609956-26539-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>

* Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> [160413 22:00]:
> pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry uses ffs which gives bit indices
> ranging from 1 to MAX. This leads to a corner case where we try to request
> the pin number = MAX and fails.
> 
> bit_pos value is being calculted using ffs. pin_num_from_lsb uses
> bit_pos value. pins array is populated with:
> 
> pin + pin_num_from_lsb.
> 
> The above is 1 more than usual bit indices as bit_pos uses ffs to compute
> first set bit. Hence the last of the pins array is populated with the MAX
> value and not MAX - 1 which causes error when we call pin_request.
>
> mask_pos is rightly calculated as ((pcs->fmask) << (bit_pos - 1))
> Consequently val_pos and submask are correct.
> 
> Hence use __ffs which gives (ffs(x) - 1) as the first bit set.
> 
> fixes: 4e7e8017a8 ("pinctrl: pinctrl-single: enhance to configure multiple pins of different modules")
> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v2:
> 
>   * Changed pcs->fshift to use __ffs instead of ffs to be consistent.

Thanks for updating it, looks good to me and still works here:

Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>


> Boot tesed on da850-evm and checked the pinctrl sysfs nodes.
> 
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> index fb126d5..cf9bafa 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> @@ -1280,9 +1280,9 @@ static int pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry(struct pcs_device *pcs,
>  
>  		/* Parse pins in each row from LSB */
>  		while (mask) {
> -			bit_pos = ffs(mask);
> +			bit_pos = __ffs(mask);
>  			pin_num_from_lsb = bit_pos / pcs->bits_per_pin;
> -			mask_pos = ((pcs->fmask) << (bit_pos - 1));
> +			mask_pos = ((pcs->fmask) << bit_pos);
>  			val_pos = val & mask_pos;
>  			submask = mask & mask_pos;
>  
> @@ -1852,7 +1852,7 @@ static int pcs_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "pinctrl-single,function-mask",
>  				   &pcs->fmask);
>  	if (!ret) {
> -		pcs->fshift = ffs(pcs->fmask) - 1;
> +		pcs->fshift = __ffs(pcs->fmask);
>  		pcs->fmax = pcs->fmask >> pcs->fshift;
>  	} else {
>  		/* If mask property doesn't exist, function mux is invalid. */
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2]  pinctrl: pinctrl-single: Fix pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry to use __ffs than ffs
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 09:02:30 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160414160229.GK5995@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460609956-26539-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>

* Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> [160413 22:00]:
> pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry uses ffs which gives bit indices
> ranging from 1 to MAX. This leads to a corner case where we try to request
> the pin number = MAX and fails.
> 
> bit_pos value is being calculted using ffs. pin_num_from_lsb uses
> bit_pos value. pins array is populated with:
> 
> pin + pin_num_from_lsb.
> 
> The above is 1 more than usual bit indices as bit_pos uses ffs to compute
> first set bit. Hence the last of the pins array is populated with the MAX
> value and not MAX - 1 which causes error when we call pin_request.
>
> mask_pos is rightly calculated as ((pcs->fmask) << (bit_pos - 1))
> Consequently val_pos and submask are correct.
> 
> Hence use __ffs which gives (ffs(x) - 1) as the first bit set.
> 
> fixes: 4e7e8017a8 ("pinctrl: pinctrl-single: enhance to configure multiple pins of different modules")
> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v2:
> 
>   * Changed pcs->fshift to use __ffs instead of ffs to be consistent.

Thanks for updating it, looks good to me and still works here:

Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>


> Boot tesed on da850-evm and checked the pinctrl sysfs nodes.
> 
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> index fb126d5..cf9bafa 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> @@ -1280,9 +1280,9 @@ static int pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry(struct pcs_device *pcs,
>  
>  		/* Parse pins in each row from LSB */
>  		while (mask) {
> -			bit_pos = ffs(mask);
> +			bit_pos = __ffs(mask);
>  			pin_num_from_lsb = bit_pos / pcs->bits_per_pin;
> -			mask_pos = ((pcs->fmask) << (bit_pos - 1));
> +			mask_pos = ((pcs->fmask) << bit_pos);
>  			val_pos = val & mask_pos;
>  			submask = mask & mask_pos;
>  
> @@ -1852,7 +1852,7 @@ static int pcs_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	ret = of_property_read_u32(np, "pinctrl-single,function-mask",
>  				   &pcs->fmask);
>  	if (!ret) {
> -		pcs->fshift = ffs(pcs->fmask) - 1;
> +		pcs->fshift = __ffs(pcs->fmask);
>  		pcs->fmax = pcs->fmask >> pcs->fshift;
>  	} else {
>  		/* If mask property doesn't exist, function mux is invalid. */
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2016-04-14 16:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-14  4:59 [PATCH v2] pinctrl: pinctrl-single: Fix pcs_parse_bits_in_pinctrl_entry to use __ffs than ffs Keerthy
2016-04-14  4:59 ` Keerthy
2016-04-14  4:59 ` Keerthy
2016-04-14 16:02 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2016-04-14 16:02   ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15  9:27 ` Linus Walleij
2016-04-15  9:27   ` Linus Walleij
2016-04-15 15:22   ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-15 15:22     ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-23  9:45     ` Linus Walleij
2016-04-23  9:45       ` Linus Walleij
2016-04-26 16:17       ` Tony Lindgren
2016-04-26 16:17         ` Tony Lindgren

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160414160229.GK5995@atomide.com \
    --to=tony@atomide.com \
    --cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
    --cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
    --cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.