linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH/RFC v10 15/19] media: Add registration helpers for V4L2 flash sub-devices

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: <20150109205432.GP18076@amd>
Date:	Fri, 9 Jan 2015 21:54:32 +0100
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@...sung.com>
Cc:	linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com, b.zolnierkie@...sung.com,
	cooloney@...il.com, rpurdie@...ys.net, sakari.ailus@....fi,
	s.nawrocki@...sung.com, Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v10 15/19] media: Add registration helpers for V4L2
 flash sub-devices

On Fri 2015-01-09 16:23:05, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
> This patch adds helper functions for registering/unregistering
> LED Flash class devices as V4L2 sub-devices. The functions should
> be called from the LED subsystem device driver. In case the
> support for V4L2 Flash sub-devices is disabled in the kernel
> config the functions' empty versions will be used.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@...sung.com>
> Acked-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
> Cc: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>
> Cc: Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>

Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>

> +	/*
> +	 * Indicator leds, unlike torch leds, are turned on/off basing
> on

leds -> LEDs.

> +	 * the state of V4L2_CID_FLASH_INDICATOR_INTENSITY control only.
> +	 * Therefore it must be possible to set it to 0 level which in
> +	 * the LED subsystem reflects LED_OFF state.
> +	 */
> +	if (cdata_id != INDICATOR_INTENSITY)
> +		++__intensity;

And normally we'd do i++ instead of ++i, and avoid __ for local
variables...?

> +/**
> + * struct v4l2_flash_ctrl_config - V4L2 Flash controls initialization data
> + * @intensity:			constraints for the led in a non-flash mode
> + * @flash_intensity:		V4L2_CID_FLASH_INTENSITY settings constraints
> + * @flash_timeout:		V4L2_CID_FLASH_TIMEOUT constraints
> + * @flash_faults:		possible flash faults
> + * @has_external_strobe:	external strobe capability
> + * @indicator_led:		signifies that a led is of indicator type
> + */
> +struct v4l2_flash_ctrl_config {
> +	struct v4l2_ctrl_config intensity;
> +	struct v4l2_ctrl_config flash_intensity;
> +	struct v4l2_ctrl_config flash_timeout;
> +	u32 flash_faults;
> +	bool has_external_strobe:1;
> +	bool indicator_led:1;
> +};

I don't think you are supposed to do boolean bit arrays.
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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/