Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] pci: use helper for safer setting of driver_override

Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] pci: use helper for safer setting of driver_override

[Bjorn Helgaas]

In subject, to match drivers/pci/ convention, do something like:

  PCI: Use driver_set_override() instead of open-coding

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:13:04PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Use a helper for seting driver_override to reduce amount of duplicated
> code.

s/seting/setting/

> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
> ---
>  drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c | 24 ++++--------------------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> index 602f0fb0b007..16a163d4623e 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pci-sysfs.c
> @@ -567,31 +567,15 @@ static ssize_t driver_override_store(struct device *dev,
>  				     const char *buf, size_t count)
>  {
>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> -	char *driver_override, *old, *cp;
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	/* We need to keep extra room for a newline */
>  	if (count >= (PAGE_SIZE - 1))
>  		return -EINVAL;

This check makes no sense in the new function.  Michael alluded to
this as well.

> -	driver_override = kstrndup(buf, count, GFP_KERNEL);
> -	if (!driver_override)
> -		return -ENOMEM;
> -
> -	cp = strchr(driver_override, '\n');
> -	if (cp)
> -		*cp = '\0';
> -
> -	device_lock(dev);
> -	old = pdev->driver_override;
> -	if (strlen(driver_override)) {
> -		pdev->driver_override = driver_override;
> -	} else {
> -		kfree(driver_override);
> -		pdev->driver_override = NULL;
> -	}
> -	device_unlock(dev);
> -
> -	kfree(old);
> +	ret = driver_set_override(dev, &pdev->driver_override, buf);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  
>  	return count;
>  }
> -- 
> 2.32.0
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] pci: use helper for safer setting of driver_override

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 08:49:15AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/02/2022 22:51, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > In subject, to match drivers/pci/ convention, do something like:
> > 
> >   PCI: Use driver_set_override() instead of open-coding
> > 
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:13:04PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> Use a helper for seting driver_override to reduce amount of duplicated
> >> code.
> >> @@ -567,31 +567,15 @@ static ssize_t driver_override_store(struct device *dev,
> >>  				     const char *buf, size_t count)
> >>  {
> >>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> >> -	char *driver_override, *old, *cp;
> >> +	int ret;
> >>  
> >>  	/* We need to keep extra room for a newline */
> >>  	if (count >= (PAGE_SIZE - 1))
> >>  		return -EINVAL;
> > 
> > This check makes no sense in the new function.  Michael alluded to
> > this as well.
> 
> I am not sure if I got your comment properly. You mean here:
> 1. Move this check to driver_set_override()?
> 2. Remove the check entirely?

I was mistaken about the purpose of the comment and the check.  I
thought it had to do with *this* function, and this function doesn't
add a newline, and there's no obvious connection with PAGE_SIZE.

But looking closer, I think the "extra room for a newline" is really
to make sure that *driver_override_show()* can add a newline and have
it still fit within the PAGE_SIZE sysfs limit.

Most driver_override_*() functions have the same comment, so maybe
this was obvious to everybody except me :)  I do see that spi.c adds
"when displaying value" at the end, which helps a lot.

Sorry for the wild goose chase.

> >> -	driver_override = kstrndup(buf, count, GFP_KERNEL);
> >> -	if (!driver_override)
> >> -		return -ENOMEM;
> >> -
> >> -	cp = strchr(driver_override, '\n');
> >> -	if (cp)
> >> -		*cp = '\0';
> >> -
> >> -	device_lock(dev);
> >> -	old = pdev->driver_override;
> >> -	if (strlen(driver_override)) {
> >> -		pdev->driver_override = driver_override;
> >> -	} else {
> >> -		kfree(driver_override);
> >> -		pdev->driver_override = NULL;
> >> -	}
> >> -	device_unlock(dev);
> >> -
> >> -	kfree(old);
> >> +	ret = driver_set_override(dev, &pdev->driver_override, buf);
> >> +	if (ret)
> >> +		return ret;
> >>  
> >>  	return count;
> >>  }
> >> -- 
> >> 2.32.0
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [PATCH v2 05/11] pci: use helper for safer setting of driver_override

[Bjorn Helgaas]

On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 10:36:20AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 00:52, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 08:49:15AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 23/02/2022 22:51, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >>> In subject, to match drivers/pci/ convention, do something like:
> >>>
> >>>   PCI: Use driver_set_override() instead of open-coding
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 08:13:04PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>>> Use a helper for seting driver_override to reduce amount of duplicated
> >>>> code.
> >>>> @@ -567,31 +567,15 @@ static ssize_t driver_override_store(struct device *dev,
> >>>>  				     const char *buf, size_t count)
> >>>>  {
> >>>>  	struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev);
> >>>> -	char *driver_override, *old, *cp;
> >>>> +	int ret;
> >>>>  
> >>>>  	/* We need to keep extra room for a newline */
> >>>>  	if (count >= (PAGE_SIZE - 1))
> >>>>  		return -EINVAL;
> >>>
> >>> This check makes no sense in the new function.  Michael alluded to
> >>> this as well.
> >>
> >> I am not sure if I got your comment properly. You mean here:
> >> 1. Move this check to driver_set_override()?
> >> 2. Remove the check entirely?
> > 
> > I was mistaken about the purpose of the comment and the check.  I
> > thought it had to do with *this* function, and this function doesn't
> > add a newline, and there's no obvious connection with PAGE_SIZE.
> > 
> > But looking closer, I think the "extra room for a newline" is really
> > to make sure that *driver_override_show()* can add a newline and have
> > it still fit within the PAGE_SIZE sysfs limit.
> > 
> > Most driver_override_*() functions have the same comment, so maybe
> > this was obvious to everybody except me :)  I do see that spi.c adds
> > "when displaying value" at the end, which helps a lot.
> > 
> > Sorry for the wild goose chase.
> 
> I think I will move this check anyway to driver_set_override() helper,
> because there is no particular benefit to have duplicated all over. The
> helper will receive "count" argument so can perform all checks.

Thanks, I think that would be good!

Bjorn
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization