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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 17:15:01 +0200 From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org> Cc: wagi@...om.org, yi1.li@...ux.intel.com, takahiro.akashi@...aro.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, luto@...nel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com, dwmw2@...radead.org, rjw@...ysocki.net, atull@...nel.org, moritz.fischer@...us.com, pmladek@...e.com, johannes.berg@...el.com, emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com, luciano.coelho@...el.com, kvalo@...eaurora.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, keescook@...omium.org, dhowells@...hat.com, pjones@...hat.com, hdegoede@...hat.com, alan@...ux.intel.com, tytso@....edu, dave@...olabs.net, mawilcox@...rosoft.com, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, mfuzzey@...keon.com, jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com, nbroeking@...com, jewalt@...innovations.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: cleanup - group and document up private firmware parameters On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 03:54:22PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > +enum fw_priv_reqs { > + FW_PRIV_REQ_FALLBACK = 1 << 0, > + FW_PRIV_REQ_FALLBACK_UEVENT = 1 << 1, > + FW_PRIV_REQ_NO_CACHE = 1 << 2, > + FW_PRIV_REQ_OPTIONAL = 1 << 3, > +}; checkpatch.pl didn't complain about a lack of using BIT()? > + > +/** > + * struct fw_priv_params - private firmware parameters > + * @mode: mode of operation > + * @priv_reqs: private set of &enum fw_priv_reqs, private requirements for > + * the firmware request > + * @alloc_buf: buffer area allocated by the caller so we can place the > + * respective firmware > + * @alloc_buf_size: size of the @alloc_buf > + */ > +struct fw_priv_params { > + enum fw_api_mode mode; > + u64 priv_reqs; Agreed that this should not be "priv_reqs" but some other better name. > + void *alloc_buf; > + size_t alloc_buf_size; > +}; > + > +#define fw_req_param_sync(priv_params) \ > + (priv_params->mode == FW_API_SYNC) > +#define fw_req_param_async(priv_params) \ > + (priv_params->mode == FW_API_ASYNC) > + > +#define fw_param_use_fallback(params) \ > + (!!((params)->priv_reqs & FW_PRIV_REQ_FALLBACK)) > +#define fw_param_uevent(params) \ > + (!!((params)->priv_reqs & FW_PRIV_REQ_FALLBACK_UEVENT)) > +#define fw_param_nocache(params) \ > + (!!((params)->priv_reqs & FW_PRIV_REQ_NO_CACHE)) > +#define fw_param_optional(params) \ > + (!!((params)->priv_reqs & FW_PRIV_REQ_OPTIONAL)) static inline functions to get proper typechecking? > static bool fw_get_builtin_firmware(struct firmware *fw, const char *name, > - void *buf, size_t size) > + struct fw_priv_params *fw_priv_params) Shouldn't the priv pointer hang off of 'struct firmware' in an opaque type that can not be seen/accessed outside of this file? That way you don't have to change the functions by adding new parameters, what you did seems a lot more complex. thanks, greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists