linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v1 3/3] ACPI / PMIC: Add TI PMIC TPS68470 operation region driver

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: <6F87890CF0F5204F892DEA1EF0D77A59725BED54@FMSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Sat, 10 Jun 2017 00:07:40 +0000
From:   "Mani, Rajmohan" <rajmohan.mani@...el.com>
To:     Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@....fi>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "Alexandre Courbot" <gnurou@...il.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        "Len Brown" <lenb@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 3/3] ACPI / PMIC: Add TI PMIC TPS68470 operation
 region driver

Hi Sakari, Andy,

> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] ACPI / PMIC: Add TI PMIC TPS68470 operation
> region driver
> 
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:37:12PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > >> +static acpi_status ti_pmic_common_handler(u32 function,
> > > +                                       acpi_physical_address address,
> > > +                                       u32 bits, u64 *value,
> > > +                                       void *handler_context,
> >
> > > handler_context is unused.
> >
> > >> +                                                  int, int, u64 *),
> > >> +                                       int (*update)(struct regmap *,
> > >> +                                                     int, int, u64),
> > >> +                                       struct ti_pmic_table *table,
> > >> +                                       int table_size)
> >
> > I would even split this to have separate update() and get() paths
> > instead of having such a monster of parameters.
> 
> I'm not really worried about the two callbacks --- you have the compexity,
> which is agruably rather manageable, split into a number of caller functions. I'd
> rather keep it as-is.
> 

Ack