linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/7] platform/x86: fujitsu-laptop: Define constants for FUNC operations

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: <CAHp75VdDQ1xAYcXEN04kSug2sgi-G8+7PBEOC8MJSBw7gSCyRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Feb 2018 18:08:52 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl>
Cc:     Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@...t42.net>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] platform/x86: fujitsu-laptop: Define constants for
 FUNC operations

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 11:15 PM, Michał Kępień <kernel@...pniu.pl> wrote:
> Various functions exposed by the firmware through the FUNC interface
> tend to use a consistent set of integers for denoting the type of
> operation to be performed for a specified feature.  Use named constants
> instead of integers in each call_fext_func() invocation in order to more
> clearly convey the intent of each call.
>
> Note that FUNC_FLAGS is a bit peculiar:

> +/* FUNC interface - operations */
> +#define OP_GET                         BIT(1)
> +#define OP_GET_CAPS                    0
> +#define OP_GET_EVENTS                  BIT(0)
> +#define OP_GET_EXT                     BIT(2)
> +#define OP_SET                         BIT(0)
> +#define OP_SET_EXT                     (BIT(2) | BIT(0))

Hmm... this looks unordered a bit.
And plain 0 doesn't look right in this concept (something like (0 <<
0) would probably do it).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko