Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: pinctrl-imx: fix map setting problem if NO_PAD_CTL

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 03:41:41PM +0800, Hui Wang wrote:
> new_map is allocated according to map_num instead of grp->npins,
> if a pin or some pins of a group has NO_PAD_CTL property, the map_num
> and the grp->npin are different definitely.
> 
> When we set mapping information to the new_map[], we should skip those
> pins with NO_PAD_CTL from index, otherwise it is possible the driver
> will aceesss to a unallocated region.
> 
Good catching.
Thanks.

> Cc: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Hui Wang <jason77.wang@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> This problem is easily reproduced if we set pinctrl in the
> ${board}.dts like following:
> fsl,pins = <pin_func_id1   config_with_NO_PAD_CTL
>             pin_func_id2   config_with_NO_PAD_CTL
>             pin_func_id3   config_normal>;
> 
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c | 9 +++++----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
> index dd6d93a..0e21abb 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-imx.c
> @@ -146,6 +146,7 @@ static int imx_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  	struct pinctrl_map *new_map;
>  	struct device_node *parent;
>  	int map_num = 1;
> +	int map_pos = 0;
>  	int i;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -186,11 +187,11 @@ static int imx_dt_node_to_map(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev,
>  	new_map++;
>  	for (i = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
>  		if (!(grp->configs[i] & IMX_NO_PAD_CTL)) {
> -			new_map[i].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
> -			new_map[i].data.configs.group_or_pin =
> +			new_map[map_pos].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
> +			new_map[map_pos].data.configs.group_or_pin =
>  					pin_get_name(pctldev, grp->pins[i]);
> -			new_map[i].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
> -			new_map[i].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
> +			new_map[map_pos].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
> +			new_map[map_pos++].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
I'm ok with the change, only a minor comment:
Does the change as follows look better?

-       for (i = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
+       for (i = j = 0; i < grp->npins; i++) {
                if (!(grp->configs[i] & IMX_NO_PAD_CTL)) {
-                       new_map[i].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
-                       new_map[i].data.configs.group_or_pin =
+                       new_map[j].type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_CONFIGS_PIN;
+                       new_map[j].data.configs.group_or_pin =
                                        pin_get_name(pctldev, grp->pins[i]);
-                       new_map[i].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
-                       new_map[i].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
+                       new_map[j].data.configs.configs = &grp->configs[i];
+                       new_map[j].data.configs.num_configs = 1;
+                       j++;

Regards
Dong Aisheng


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel


[Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [PDAs]     [Linux]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Photos]

Add to Google Follow linuxarm on Twitter