linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences

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: <50A60AF6.9080509@nvidia.com>
Date:	Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:44:22 +0900
From:	Alex Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
To:	Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
CC:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>,
	Mark Zhang <markz@...dia.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Leela Krishna Amudala <l.krishna@...sung.com>,
	"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org" 
	<devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/3] Runtime Interpreted Power Sequences

On 11/16/2012 04:26 PM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
>> +#include "power_seq_delay.c"
>> +#include "power_seq_regulator.c"
>> +#include "power_seq_pwm.c"
>> +#include "power_seq_gpio.c"
>
> This is odd, although I remember you already explained why you have to
> include the .c files, instead of linking them separately. But I forgot the
> reason. :) I think this deserves a comment in the code.

This is because of the table right after these includes:

static const struct power_seq_res_ops power_seq_ops[POWER_SEQ_NUM_TYPES] = {
	[POWER_SEQ_DELAY] = POWER_SEQ_DELAY_TYPE,
	[POWER_SEQ_REGULATOR] = POWER_SEQ_REGULATOR_TYPE,
	[POWER_SEQ_PWM] = POWER_SEQ_PWM_TYPE,
	[POWER_SEQ_GPIO] = POWER_SEQ_GPIO_TYPE,
};

The POWER_SEQ_*_TYPE macros are defined in the C files. It's the 
simplest way to initialize this table, and the code inside these C files 
is short and simple enough that I thought I would be forgiven. :)

At first everything was in power_seq.c and it was fine, then I thought 
it would be better to move resource support code into their own filesm 
and now everybody is asking. :P

But yeah, maybe it would be even better to not stop halfway and use 
dynamic linking.

Comment added for the time being. ;)

>> +static int of_power_seq_parse_step(struct device *dev,
>> +				   struct device_node *node,
>> +				   struct power_seq *seq,
>> +				   unsigned int step_nbr,
>> +				   struct list_head *resources)
>> +{
>> +	struct power_seq_step *step = &seq->steps[step_nbr];
>> +	struct power_seq_resource res, *res2;
>> +	const char *type;
>> +	int i, err;
>
> nit: one variable declaration per line.

Fair enough - but is that a convention? checkpatch.pl was happy with these.

Thanks,
Alex.


--
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/