linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] thermal: of: Extend of-thermal.c to provide check if trip point is enabled

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 26 Nov 2014 09:31:09 +0100
From:	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
To:	Eduardo Valentin <edubezval@...il.com>
Cc:	Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...ess.pl>,
	Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
	Abhilash Kesavan <kesavan.abhilash@...il.com>,
	Abhilash Kesavan <a.kesavan@...sung.com>,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Caesar Wang <caesar.wang@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] thermal: of: Extend of-thermal.c to provide check
 if trip point is enabled

Hi Eduardo,

> 
> Lukasz,
> 
> Same stuff here.
> 
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 05:21:26PM +0100, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > This patch extends the of-thermal.c to provide check if trip point
> > is enabled.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski <l.majewski@...sung.com>
> > ---
> > Changes for v2:
> > - Replace int with bool
> > - Replace 1/0 with true/false
> > - Add check if data pointer is not NULL
> > - Add missing doxygen style comment for the function
> > ---
> >  drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c   | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/thermal/thermal_core.h |  5 +++++
> >  2 files changed, 25 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c
> > b/drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c index 7170822..336af7f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/of-thermal.c
> > @@ -132,6 +132,26 @@ int of_thermal_get_ntrips(struct
> > thermal_zone_device *tz) return data->ntrips;
> >  }
> >  
> > +/**
> > + * of_thermal_is_trip_en - function to check if trip point is
> > enabled
> > + *
> > + * @tz:	pointer to a thermal zone
> > + * @trip:	trip point to evaluate
> > + *
> > + * This function is responsible for checking if passed trip point
> > is enabled
> > + *
> > + * Return: true if trip point is enabled, false otherwise
> > + */
> > +bool of_thermal_is_trip_en(struct thermal_zone_device *tz, int
> > trip)
> 
> This one looks more like "is this trip point valid?" than "is this
> trip point enabled?", isn't it?
> 
> By having such a function to check if a trip is enabled, one would
> expect to have functions to enable / disable trips points.
> 
> What do you think of naming it:
> of_thermal_is_trip_valid()
> ?
> 

Good point. I think that of_thermal_is_trip_valid() is a better name.

> > +{
> > +	struct __thermal_zone *data = tz->devdata;
> > +
> > +	if (!data || trip >= data->ntrips || trip < 0)
> 
> Even your check is about looking if the trip value is within a range,
> telling the caller if the trip is valid or not, right?

Yes. Correct. it justifies function rename to of_thermal_is_trip_valid()

> 
> > +		return false;
> > +
> > +	return true;
> > +}
> > +
> 
> Missing:
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_thermal_is_trip_en);
> 
> or
> 
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_thermal_is_trip_valid);

I will add that, no problem.

> 
> >  static int of_thermal_get_trend(struct thermal_zone_device *tz,
> > int trip, enum thermal_trend *trend)
> >  {
> > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.h
> > b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.h index c3c7b82..466208c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.h
> > +++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.h
> > @@ -90,6 +90,7 @@ static inline void
> > thermal_gov_user_space_unregister(void) {} int
> > of_parse_thermal_zones(void); void of_thermal_destroy_zones(void);
> >  int of_thermal_get_ntrips(struct thermal_zone_device *);
> > +bool of_thermal_is_trip_en(struct thermal_zone_device *, int);
> >  #else
> >  static inline int of_parse_thermal_zones(void) { return 0; }
> >  static inline void of_thermal_destroy_zones(void) { }
> > @@ -97,6 +98,10 @@ static inline int of_thermal_get_ntrips(struct
> > thermal_zone_device *) {
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> > +static inline bool of_thermal_is_trip_en(struct
> > thermal_zone_device *, int)
> 
> Same as in patch 01, this produces compilation error. Please, name
> your parameters.

Ok.

> 
> > +{
> > +	return 0;
> > +}
> >  #endif
> >  
> >  #endif /* __THERMAL_CORE_H__ */
> > -- 
> > 2.0.0.rc2
> > 



-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/