linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: When constraining modes fall back to higher power modes

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, 30 Mar 2011 08:39:10 +0900
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>
Cc:	David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: When constraining modes fall back to higher
 power modes

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 12:29:24AM +0100, Liam Girdwood wrote:

> It's late and I'm wondering if it's cleaner here just to :-
> 
> if (mask & *mode)
> 	return 0;

> *mode = fls(mask);
> if (*mode)
> 	return 0;

This will end up selecting the highest mode in mask, even if it's lower
than the one asked for, you'd need to recheck against the original mask.
There's a few ways I can think of to do that but they're none of them
exceptionally pretty.
--
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/