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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2012 11:18:48 +0800 From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com> To: "Zhang, Sonic" <Sonic.Zhang@...log.com> Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] regulator: ad5398: Fix min/max current limit boundary checking > >That is why we need to add: > >if (min_uA < chip->min_uA) > > min_uA = chip->min_uA; > > > > Yes, but if you apply this logic to min_uA, you should apply the same logic to max_uA, even though it is not used in your application. Actually, the logic is the same: to find a supported (minmal) current in specified range. The question is the equation used in current code does not allow min_uA < chip->min_uA. Setting min_uA = chip->min_uA if min_uA < chip->min_uA does make sense because botch request actually returns the same current value. ( I mean no user visible change ) Adding below logic is not necessary. ( Note: Adding this or not does not have any user visible change, it's just not necessary) if (max_uA > chip->min_uA) max_uA = chip->max_uA; It is not necessary because the equation to choose selector does not depends on max_uA. No matter if we set max_uA = chip->max_uA or not in this case, it does not impact the equation to choose the selector. But, well, if you really prefer adding it. I'll send a v3 for it. Just let me know how do you think. Regards, Axel -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists