From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94A2DC138; Fri, 5 Apr 2024 04:44:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712292245; cv=none; b=Wc2dqQHT1Hg39cy0GRCRKAXJFcRtzfVZhQjNV64vRuTzVmWfSbHFabvzvysPfp21kqPGb5pnbTnH6phzgP1C5EcJUoHekMDEicjb+uOeWxbtxGtkyKEvLBSqjsaf2WndfnvNjvrNky6vOOEnFcHlAffmuM0+w0175P0rkShs5KI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712292245; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nP5LSoPmz6tMExekbFggHQmASZ3xuQAUPcPQ6315p7c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XwG8jG8IPX2Ly9u4vL0/TKrq1aEgisam1CDtXprbgkuiqb07AYMuwBAwmn/jkmfj9Q5muuJi0TaQpg5bdkRDOePE4RSxQaaQUKrGji/x1IDJutzjnvWUvAa7019pTdKMPQX1Ayn7BlwWBgR+KnHbMRajrVmPVgl+QJ99SVeeDJg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=Kl3pFkAp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="Kl3pFkAp" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4B1DFC433F1; Fri, 5 Apr 2024 04:44:04 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1712292245; bh=nP5LSoPmz6tMExekbFggHQmASZ3xuQAUPcPQ6315p7c=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Kl3pFkAptITw2b7BMS4ccJYJ2GNDXaJVO9O2I+YNvsiM4STCe/AskFJrIQiE8WtpP xcSI6CknCzHADaD8kDSEBWy3SgeAMTngU2YKd79J8ItyAAgzk6tqee3uDuv79S5pGO LlRwKqADyKQhOzkI6QSxHbDPYcBRKhwCn9LulNRg= Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 06:43:56 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski , Johan Hovold , Krishna Kurapati , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Rob Herring , Bjorn Andersson , Wesley Cheng , Konrad Dybcio , Conor Dooley , Thinh Nguyen , Felipe Balbi , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, quic_ppratap@quicinc.com, quic_jackp@quicinc.com, Johan Hovold Subject: Re: [PATCH v19 2/9] usb: dwc3: core: Access XHCI address space temporarily to read port info Message-ID: <2024040558-undercut-sandbar-7ffc@gregkh> References: <20240404051229.3082902-1-quic_kriskura@quicinc.com> <20240404051229.3082902-3-quic_kriskura@quicinc.com> <2024040455-sitting-dictator-170c@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 06:25:48PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 02:58:29PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 10:07:27AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 04/04/2024 09:21, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 10:42:22AM +0530, Krishna Kurapati wrote: > > > > > > > >> +static int dwc3_get_num_ports(struct dwc3 *dwc) > > > >> +{ > > > >> + void __iomem *base; > > > >> + u8 major_revision; > > > >> + u32 offset; > > > >> + u32 val; > > > >> + > > > >> + /* > > > >> + * Remap xHCI address space to access XHCI ext cap regs since it is > > > >> + * needed to get information on number of ports present. > > > >> + */ > > > >> + base = ioremap(dwc->xhci_resources[0].start, > > > >> + resource_size(&dwc->xhci_resources[0])); > > > >> + if (!base) > > > >> + return PTR_ERR(base); > > > > > > > > This is obviously still broken. You need to update the return value as > > > > well. > > > > > > > > Fix in v20. > > > > > > If one patchset reaches 20 versions, I think it is time to stop and > > > really think from the beginning, why issues keep appearing and reviewers > > > are still not happy. > > > > > > Maybe you did not perform extensive internal review, which you are > > > encouraged to by your own internal policies, AFAIR. Before posting next > > > version, please really get some internal review first. > > > > Also get those internal reviewers to sign-off on the commits and have > > that show up when you post them next. That way they are also > > responsible for this patchset, it's not fair that they are making you do > > all the work here :) > > > > I like this idea and I'm open to us changing our way of handling this. > > But unless such internal review brings significant input to the > development I'd say a s-o-b would take the credit from the actual > author. It does not do that at all. It provides proof that someone else has reviewed it and agrees with it. Think of it as a "path of blame" for when things go bad (i.e. there is a bug in the submission.) Putting your name on it makes you take responsibility if that happens. > We've discussed a few times about carrying Reviewed-by et al from the > internal reviews, but as maintainer I dislike this because I'd have no > way to know if a r-b on vN means the patch was reviewed, or if it was > just "accidentally" carried from v(N-1). > But it might be worth this risk, is this something you think would be > appropriate? For some companies we REQUIRE this to happen due to low-quality submissions and waste of reviewer's time. Based on the track record here for some of these patchsets, hopefully it doesn't become a requirement for this company as well :) thanks, greg k-h