linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thermal: int340x: check for sensor when PTYP is missing

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VfV+Cx7fKnCQyHs8WzrYTuz-Uvii99jy7dToBCv-wHRQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 10 Jun 2017 01:36:34 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        "edubezval@...il.com" <edubezval@...il.com>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: int340x: check for sensor when PTYP is missing

On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 1:23 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
<srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-06-07 at 13:55 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Srinivas Pandruvada
>> <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

>> > This change checks for the presence of _TMP method and if present,
>> > then
>> > treats this device as a sensor.
>> >
>> >         status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP",
>> >                                        NULL, &priv->type);
>> >         if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> > -               result = -EINVAL;
>> > -               goto err;
>> >
>> > +               unsigned long long tmp;
>> You may use &priv->type as temporary variable, though I would go
>> other
>> way around:
>> declare tmp for function, then
>>
>>     unsigned long long tmp;
>> ...
>>     status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "PTYP",  NULL,
>> &tmp);
>>     if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>>         status = acpi_evaluate_integer(priv->adev->handle, "_TMP",
>> NULL, &tmp);
>>         if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>>             result = -EINVAL;
>>             goto err;
>>         }
>>         tmp = INT3403_TYPE_SENSOR;
>>     }
>>     priv->type = tmp;
>>
> So what are we saving by doing this way?

We make priv->type assignment in one place.

That's the difference.

So, you may choose your way of course. It's not a big deal.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko