lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 09/19] ARM: at91: make sdram/ddr register base soc independent
On 02/22/2012 11:33 PM, Ryan Mallon :
> On 22/02/12 20:39, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>
>> From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>
>> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
>> ---
>
> <snip>
>
>> +void __init at91_ioremap_ramc(int id, u32 addr, u32 size)
>> +{
>> + if (id > 1) {
>> + pr_warn("%s: id > 2\n", __func__);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> + at91_ramc_base[id] = ioremap(addr, size);
>> + if (!at91_ramc_base[id])
>> + pr_warn("Impossible to ioremap ramc.%d 0x%x\n", id, addr);
>> +}
>
>
> If this fails then you will oops if you call either at91_ramc_read or
> at91_ramc_write since they don't check if at91_ramc_base[id] is a valid
> pointer. Either this function should panic, like the other at91_ioremap
> functions, or the at91_ramc_read/write functions should check for a
> valid pointer.

Yes, as you pointed out, it is done in a not-related following patch.
I will bring the code here.


> Nitpick: The id check should probably also be BUG() or WARN() since it
> indicates a bug in the core AT91 code. pr_warn is likely to missed and
> not reported by users. Since the value is int, the check should be:
>
> if (id < 0 || id > 1)
>
> Obviously the chance of this error happening are slim, but if you are
> going to check and warn for it, it should be done properly :-).

Yes, I agree and modify it at the very moment.

thanks, best regards,
--
Nicolas Ferre


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-02-23 09:59    [W:0.055 / U:15.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site