netdev - Re: [PATCH v1 6/9] iwlwifi: mvm: Set THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE

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: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:31:27 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Stanislaw Gruszka
	 <stanislaw.gruszka@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>, Linux PM
 <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,  Miri Korenblit
 <miriam.rachel.korenblit@...el.com>, Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Daniel Lezcano
 <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,  Srinivas Pandruvada
 <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>, Petr Machata
 <petrm@...dia.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,  Shawn Guo
 <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix
 Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>, Manaf Meethalavalappu Pallikunhi
 <quic_manafm@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 6/9] iwlwifi: mvm: Set THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP
 directly

On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 17:15 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >       for (i = 0 ; i < IWL_MAX_DTS_TRIPS; i++) {
> > >               mvm->tz_device.trips[i].temperature = THERMAL_TEMP_INVALID;
> > >               mvm->tz_device.trips[i].type = THERMAL_TRIP_PASSIVE;
> > > +             mvm->tz_device.trips[i].type = THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP;
> > 
> >                 mvm->tz_device.trips[i].flags = THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP;
> > 
> > Consider using diffrent prefix for constants to diffrenciate flags and types.
> 
> Well, I can use THERMAL_TRIP_FLAG_RW_TEMP or similar, but is it really
> so confusing?
> 
> I'm wondering what others think.
> 

I'd tend to agree with Stanislaw. I did (eventually) notice the double
assignment to .type above, but had that not been visible in the context,
or you'd have removed the first one by accident, I'd really not have
thought about it twice.

The bug also makes it look like you even confused yourself ;-)

So having a clearer indication that it's a flag would make sense, I'd
say.

johannes