linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] at91 pm: Compilation fix for at91sam926x

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:	Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:17:53 -0400
From:	Andy Herzig <andrew.herzig@....com>
To:	Marc Pignat <marc.pignat@...s.ch>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	Hans-Jürgen Koch <hjk@...utronix.de>,
	andrew@...people.com, trivial@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] at91 pm: Compilation fix for at91sam926x

On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 18:01 +0200, Marc Pignat wrote:

> > > +#if defined(CONFIG_ARCH_AT91RM9200)
> > >                         at91_sys_write(AT91_SDRAMC_SRR, 1);     /*
> > > self-refresh mode */
> Why don't use:
> if (cpu_is_at91rm9200())
> 	at91_sys_write(AT91_SDRAMC_SRR, 1);
> 
No reason. That looks good to me.

> > >  #ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > > +extern int at91_suspend_entering_slow_clock(void);
> Why do you define 3 times this function?
> Can't you place it in a .h?
I considered a .h, but I didn't see one that all drivers included. I
declare it in the 3 separate driver .c files that I saw needed it. There
is no pm.h and I didn't see the point in creating one just for that.
That of course will work if everyone likes that better. In either case,
you still have to add something to all three files.

-Andy H.
-
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/