linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] PCI: pciehp: Add pciehp_set_indicators() to jointly set LED indicators

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: <9cbb34b0-d6be-fbba-9992-9b6939018e5d@linux.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Aug 2019 19:16:53 +0300
From:   Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
To:     sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] PCI: pciehp: Add pciehp_set_indicators() to
 jointly set LED indicators

Hi,

On 8/19/19 7:06 PM, Denis Efremov wrote:
> +		switch (pwr) {
> +		case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_ON:
> +		case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_BLINK:
> +		case PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PWR_IND_OFF:
> +			cmd |= pwr;
> +			mask |= PCI_EXP_SLTCTL_PIC;
> +		}
> +

On 8/12/19 11:25 AM, sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy wrote:
> Do we need to switch case here ? if (pwr > 0) {} should work right ? 

I saved the switch here from v2. I think switch makes the inputs check more
precise and filters-out all non-valid values. Maybe this check is too strict?

We could use mask here ON|OFF|BLINK for the check, but I don't know how hardware
will handle a case, for example, pwr == ON|BLINK.

Thanks,
Denis