linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio: light: acpi-als: Report data as processed rather than raw

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: <CAKv63uujuDJDLK1Z6=UZUSRAhdUUeF_jJF92_iFyqOG_okGRzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 Jan 2016 11:16:03 +0100
From:	Crt Mori <cmo@...exis.com>
To:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc:	Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@...il.com>,
	Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>, marex@...x.de,
	marxin.liska@...il.com, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: light: acpi-als: Report data as processed rather
 than raw

On 9 January 2016 at 17:31, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:
> On 07/01/16 15:21, Gabriele Mazzotta wrote:
>> As per the ACPI specification (Revision 5.0) [1], the data coming
>> from the sensor represent the ambient light illuminance reading
>> expressed in lux. Use IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED instead of
>> IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW to signify that the data are pre-processed.
>>
>> [1] http://www.acpi.info/DOWNLOADS/ACPIspec50.pdf
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@...il.com>
> Hm. Whilst it's a fix in a sense, the original didn't really 'break'
> the ABI so I worry a little that this change may break others.
> Irritating as it is, perhaps we should keep the _RAW and add _PROCESSED
> (which will then be exactly the same value).
> We'll also then need a comment in the code, that leaving the _RAW
> elements was for ABI compatibility.
>
> What do others think?
For this case I agree to keep both for backwards ABI compatibility,
but then other drivers returning the data in basic units, should be
changed from raw to processed? I do not think this was the case
before?

Crt

>
> Jonathan
>> ---
>>  drivers/iio/light/acpi-als.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/light/acpi-als.c b/drivers/iio/light/acpi-als.c
>> index 60537ec..a53be07 100644
>> --- a/drivers/iio/light/acpi-als.c
>> +++ b/drivers/iio/light/acpi-als.c
>> @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ static const struct iio_chan_spec acpi_als_channels[] = {
>>                       .realbits       = 32,
>>                       .storagebits    = 32,
>>               },
>> -             .info_mask_separate     = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW),
>> +             .info_mask_separate     = BIT(IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED),
>>       },
>>  };
>>
>> @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ static int acpi_als_read_raw(struct iio_dev *indio_dev,
>>       s32 temp_val;
>>       int ret;
>>
>> -     if (mask != IIO_CHAN_INFO_RAW)
>> +     if (mask != IIO_CHAN_INFO_PROCESSED)
>>               return -EINVAL;
>>
>>       /* we support only illumination (_ALI) so far. */
>>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html