linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] thermal: tegra: remove unnecessary warnings

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: <ec9e034a-2789-2433-aad7-8d493d2d67c8@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Nov 2018 15:21:23 +0800
From:   Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
CC:     <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>, <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        <rui.zhang@...el.com>, <edubezval@...il.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/4] thermal: tegra: remove unnecessary warnings



On 8/11/2018 8:47 PM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 05:32:32PM +0800, Wei Ni wrote:
>> Convert warnings to info as not all platforms may
>> have all the thresholds and sensors enabled.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Wei Ni <wni@...dia.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/thermal/tegra/soctherm.c | 6 +++---
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> This seems overly generalized to me. Shouldn't we be checking in a more
> fine-grained way for the absence of thresholds and/or sensors?
> 
> Otherwise, how are going to make the difference between the sensor not
> being enabled or the device tree just missing the information?
> 
The sensor being enabled or not is controlled by device tree, if the dts
have the corresponding nodes, then the sensors should be enabled. And
the thresholds for sensor are not necessary, so I think we just need to
print out them.
BTW, in my patch 1/4, I should print out the sensor name if the sensor
not enabled and register failed.
Will update it.

> Thierry
>