Hello Pascal,

The patch looks mostly good, just a few comments below.

On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 05:29:18PM +0200, Pascal van Leeuwen wrote:
> @@ -381,10 +383,11 @@ static int safexcel_hw_init(struct safexcel_crypto_priv 
> *priv)
>                      EIP197_HIA_DxE_CFG_MAX_DATA_SIZE(8);
>               val |= EIP197_HIA_DxE_CFG_DATA_CACHE_CTRL(WR_CACHE_3BITS);
>               val |= EIP197_HIA_DSE_CFG_ALWAYS_BUFFERABLE;
> -             /* FIXME: instability issues can occur for EIP97 but disabling 
> it impact
> -              * performances.
> +             /*
> +              * FIXME: instability issues can occur for EIP97 but disabling
> +              * it impacts performance.
>                */

No need to change the comment style here.

> @@ -514,7 +517,8 @@ void safexcel_dequeue(struct safexcel_crypto_priv *priv, 
> int ring)
>       struct safexcel_context *ctx;
>       int ret, nreq = 0, cdesc = 0, rdesc = 0, commands, results;
> 
> -     /* If a request wasn't properly dequeued because of a lack of resources,
> +     /*
> +      * If a request wasn't properly dequeued because of a lack of resources,
>        * proceeded it first,
>        */

Ditto.

> @@ -543,7 +547,8 @@ void safexcel_dequeue(struct safexcel_crypto_priv *priv, 
> int ring)
> 
> -             /* In case the send() helper did not issue any command to push
> +             /*
> +              * In case the send() helper did not issue any command to push

Ditto.

> -     /* Not enough resources to handle all the requests. Bail out and save
> +     /*
> +      * Not enough resources to handle all the requests. Bail out and save

Ditto.

> @@ -731,7 +738,8 @@ static inline void 
> safexcel_handle_result_descriptor(struct safexcel_crypto_priv
>                      EIP197_xDR_PROC_xD_COUNT(tot_descs * 
> priv->config.rd_offset),
>                      EIP197_HIA_RDR(priv, ring) + EIP197_HIA_xDR_PROC_COUNT);
> 
> -     /* If the number of requests overflowed the counter, try to proceed more
> +     /*
> +      * If the number of requests overflowed the counter, try to proceed more

Ditto.

> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF)
> +/*
> + * for Device Tree platform driver
> + */

Single line comment should be:

/* comment */

> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PCI)
> +/*
> + * PCIE devices - i.e. Inside Secure development boards
> + */

Here as well.

> +static int crypto_is_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> +                            const struct pci_device_id *ent)

The whole driver uses the "safexcel_" prefix for functions. You should
use it here as well for consistency.

> +void crypto_is_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)

Here as well.

> +static const struct pci_device_id crypto_is_pci_ids[] = {

Here as well.

> +static struct pci_driver crypto_is_pci_driver = {

Here as well.

> +static int __init crypto_is_init(void)

Here as well.

> +static void __exit crypto_is_exit(void)

Here as well.

Thanks,
Antoine

-- 
Antoine Ténart, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

Reply via email to