linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) split set&show temp as common codes

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: <530C527F.1020806@nvidia.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:21:19 +0800
From:	Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	"khali@...ux-fr.org" <khali@...ux-fr.org>
CC:	"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hwmon: (lm90) split set&show temp as common codes

On 02/25/2014 02:32 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 02/24/2014 10:21 PM, Wei Ni wrote:
>> Split set&show temp codes as common functions, so we can use it
>> directly when implement linux thermal framework.
>> And handle error return value for the lm90_select_remote_channel
>> and write_tempx, then set_temp8 and set_temp11 could return it
>> to user-space.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/hwmon/lm90.c |  170 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>>   1 file changed, 115 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>> index c9ff08d..fb9e224 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/lm90.c
>> @@ -473,20 +473,29 @@ static int lm90_read16(struct i2c_client *client, u8 regh, u8 regl, u16 *value)
>>    * various registers have different meanings as a result of selecting a
>>    * non-default remote channel.
>>    */
>> -static inline void lm90_select_remote_channel(struct i2c_client *client,
>> -					      struct lm90_data *data,
>> -					      int channel)
>> +static inline int lm90_select_remote_channel(struct i2c_client *client,
>> +					     struct lm90_data *data,
>> +					     int channel)
>>   {
>>   	u8 config;
>> +	int err;
>>
>>   	if (data->kind == max6696) {
>>   		lm90_read_reg(client, LM90_REG_R_CONFIG1, &config);
>>   		config &= ~0x08;
>>   		if (channel)
>>   			config |= 0x08;
>> -		i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1,
>> -					  config);
>> +		err = i2c_smbus_write_byte_data(client, LM90_REG_W_CONFIG1,
>> +						config);
>> +		if (err < 0) {
>> +			dev_err(&client->dev,
>> +				"Failed to select remote channel %d, err %d\n",
>> +				channel, err);
>> +			return err;
> 
> Not my call to make, but I really dislike all that new noisiness.
> Sure, it is ok to pass the error back, but in my opinion that is
> good enough. If every driver in the kernel would be that noisy,
> the log would be all but useless.

This was discussed in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/12/227
Jean wish to catch and return write errors,then the set_temp8() could
return error to user-space.

Thanks.
Wei.

> 
> Guenter
> 

--
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/