linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] leds: lm3532: Add full scale current configuration

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]

Date:   Tue, 20 Aug 2019 12:48:12 -0500
From:   Dan Murphy <dmurphy@...com>
To:     Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
CC:     <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>, <tony@...mide.com>, <sre@...nel.org>,
        <nekit1000@...il.com>, <mpartap@....net>, <merlijn@...zup.org>,
        <linux-leds@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] leds: lm3532: Add full scale current configuration

Hello

On 8/20/19 11:29 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>>> No need to move ctrl_brt_pointer... to keep order consistent with docs.
>> OK I will reset the patches and get rid of that change.  I think this got
>> moved when I applied the v1 patch.
>>
>>
>>>> +		fs_current_val = led->full_scale_current - LM3532_FS_CURR_MIN /
>>>> +				 LM3532_FS_CURR_STEP;
>>> The computation is wrong ... needs () AFAICT.
>> Hmm. Doesn't order of operations take precedence?
>>
>> I will add the () unless checkpatch cribs about them
> I may be misunderstanding. What do you expect the computation to be? /
> has higher priority than -, right? Can you test it provides expected
> results?

Fixed.  I think this is what you expected.

fs_current_val = (led->full_scale_current - LM3532_FS_CURR_MIN) /
                             LM3532_FS_CURR_STEP;


> 									Pavel