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]

Date:   Wed, 28 Aug 2019 09:24:51 +1000
From:   "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@...il.com>
To:     efremov@...ux.com
Cc:     sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] PCI: pciehp: Add pciehp_set_indicators() to
 jointly set LED indicators

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 2:17 AM Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 8/19/19 7:06 PM, Denis Efremov wrote:
> 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?

Sounds like you're overthinking it tbh. If want to catch programming
errors then a WARN_ON_ONCE() in the default case would be better than
silently ignoring invalid values, but it's pretty hard to care.

> 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.

ON|BLINK is the same as OFF