linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ibmaem: New driver for power/energy meters in IBM System X hardware

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]

Message-ID: <20080424221645.GA16404@tree.beaverton.ibm.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:16:46 -0700
From:	"Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@...ibm.com>
To:	Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
Cc:	"Mark M. Hoffman" <mhoffman@...htlink.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	lm-sensors <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ibmaem: New driver for power/energy meters in IBM
	System X hardware

On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 10:05:25PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> It really shouldn't be necessary to have all of these macro functions.  
> In this above macro, you would just have to pass the ro and rw  
> structures along with a remove function pointer.  Since all of your  
> types have common members, you could just have a common substructure and  
> pass that around.

Hmm... it isn't too difficult to refactor the registration function to
make it easier to look at, though I'd rather keep the AEM1 and AEM2 guts
separate rather than aggressively eliminating macros by making the AEM1
structs a subset of the AEM2 structs.

--D
--
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/