lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 1/5] crypto: aspeed: Add HACE hash driver
Le Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 05:44:22PM +0800, Neal Liu a écrit :
> Hash and Crypto Engine (HACE) is designed to accelerate the
> throughput of hash data digest, encryption, and decryption.
>
> Basically, HACE can be divided into two independently engines
> - Hash Engine and Crypto Engine. This patch aims to add HACE
> hash engine driver for hash accelerator.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neal Liu <neal_liu@aspeedtech.com>
> Signed-off-by: Johnny Huang <johnny_huang@aspeedtech.com>
> ---

Hello

I have some minor comments below.

> +++ b/drivers/crypto/aspeed/aspeed-hace-hash.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,1428 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> +/*
> + * Copyright (c) 2021 Aspeed Technology Inc.
> + */
> +
> +#include "aspeed-hace.h"
> +
> +#ifdef ASPEED_AHASH_DEBUG
> +#define AHASH_DBG(h, fmt, ...) \
> + dev_dbg((h)->dev, "%s() " fmt, __func__, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> +#else
> +#define AHASH_DBG(h, fmt, ...) \
> + ((void)(h))
> +#endif

Hello why not direclty use dev_dbg ?
You will still need something to do to enable dev_dbg, so why force to add the need to re-compile it with ASPEED_AHASH_DEBUG ?


[...]

> + if (dma_mapping_error(hace_dev->dev, rctx->digest_dma_addr)) {
> + dev_warn(hace_dev->dev, "dma_map() rctx digest error\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }

An error displayed as warning.

[...]
> + if (!sg_len) {
> + dev_warn(hace_dev->dev, "dma_map_sg() src error\n");

Same here. In fact you have lot of error displayed as warning in the driver.

[...]
> +/* Weak function for HACE hash */
> +void __weak aspeed_register_hace_hash_algs(struct aspeed_hace_dev *hace_dev)
> +{
> + pr_warn("%s: Not supported yet\n", __func__);
> +}
> +
> +void __weak aspeed_unregister_hace_hash_algs(struct aspeed_hace_dev *hace_dev)
> +{
> + pr_warn("%s: Not supported yet\n", __func__);
> +}

Why not use dev_warn ?


[...]

> +struct aspeed_sg_list {
> + u32 len;
> + u32 phy_addr;
> +};

Since it is a descriptor where all member are written with cpu_to_le32(), it should be __le32.

Regards

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-06-29 14:37    [W:0.064 / U:1.368 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site