linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] typec: tcpm: Represent source supply through power

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <03fddd26-f554-b4a5-3fd3-04a7921a9f29@roeck-us.net>
Date:   Thu, 22 Mar 2018 06:20:09 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Adam Thomson <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, Jun Li <jun.li@....com>
Cc:     "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] typec: tcpm: Represent source supply through
 power_supply

On 03/22/2018 03:40 AM, Adam Thomson wrote:
> On 22 March 2018 04:09, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> 
>>> +static int tcpm_psy_set_prop(struct power_supply *psy,
>>> +			     enum power_supply_property psp,
>>> +			     const union power_supply_propval *val)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct tcpm_port *port = power_supply_get_drvdata(psy);
>>> +	int ret = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	switch (psp) {
>>> +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_ONLINE:
>>> +		ret = tcpm_psy_set_online(port, val);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_VOLTAGE_NOW:
>>> +		if ((val->intval < (port->pps_data.min_volt * 1000)) ||
>>> +		    (val->intval > (port->pps_data.max_volt * 1000)))
>>> +			ret = -EINVAL;
>>> +		else
>>> +			ret = tcpm_pps_set_out_volt(port, (val->intval / 1000));
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case POWER_SUPPLY_PROP_CURRENT_NOW:
>>> +		if (val->intval > (port->pps_data.max_curr * 1000))
>>> +			ret = -EINVAL;
>>> +		else
>>> +			ret = tcpm_pps_set_op_curr(port, (val->intval / 1000));
>>
>> I am really not a friend of excessive ( ).
> 
> Yes, I got that. :) I am of the opinion that they should be used to enforce
> precedence. This to me is good coding practice and makes it unambiguous for the
> reader. That's why I use them as above. Do you think the above uses make it
> harder to understand or more difficult to maintain?
> 
It confuses me and makes me think I am missing something, and causes me to miss
the _real_ problems. If the compiler is not able to enforce precedence, even more so
in situations like the above, I think it is about time to dump it.

Either case, your call to make. I wont give patches with excessive ( ) a Reviewed-by:,
but then others can review the code.

Thanks,
Guenter