linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] ASoC: sgtl5000: Improve VAG power and mute control

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: <9c9ee47c-48bd-7109-9870-8f73be1f1cfa@intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Jul 2019 20:42:10 +0200
From:   Cezary Rojewski <cezary.rojewski@...el.com>
To:     Oleksandr Suvorov <oleksandr.suvorov@...adex.com>
Cc:     Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Igor Opaniuk <igor.opaniuk@...adex.com>,
        Marcel Ziswiler <marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com>,
        "alsa-devel@...a-project.org" <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] ASoC: sgtl5000: Improve VAG power and mute control

On 2019-07-18 11:02, Oleksandr Suvorov wrote:
>   
> +enum {
> +	HP_POWER_EVENT,
> +	DAC_POWER_EVENT,
> +	ADC_POWER_EVENT,
> +	LAST_POWER_EVENT
> +};
> +
> +static u16 mute_mask[] = {
> +	SGTL5000_HP_MUTE,
> +	SGTL5000_OUTPUTS_MUTE,
> +	SGTL5000_OUTPUTS_MUTE
> +};

If mute_mask[] is only used within common handler, you may consider 
declaring const array within said handler instead (did not check that 
myself).
Otherwise, simple comment for the second _OUTPUTS_MUTE should suffice - 
its not self explanatory why you doubled that mask.

> +
>   /* sgtl5000 private structure in codec */
>   struct sgtl5000_priv {
>   	int sysclk;	/* sysclk rate */
> @@ -137,8 +157,109 @@ struct sgtl5000_priv {
>   	u8 micbias_voltage;
>   	u8 lrclk_strength;
>   	u8 sclk_strength;
> +	u16 mute_state[LAST_POWER_EVENT];
>   };
>   

When I spoke of LAST enum constant, I did not really had this specific 
usage in mind.

 From design perspective, _LAST_ does not exist and should never be 
referred to as "the next option" i.e.: new enum constant.
That is way preferred usage is:
u16 mute_state[ADC_POWER_EVENT+1;
-or-
u16 mute_state[LAST_POWER_EVENT+1];

Maybe I'm just being radical here :)

Czarek