linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (ina3221) Add summation feature support

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: <20191021081211.GA5684@Asurada>
Date:   Mon, 21 Oct 2019 01:12:12 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     jdelvare@...e.com, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, corbet@....net,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwmon: (ina3221) Add summation feature support

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 09:36:28AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 04:57:02PM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> > This patch implements the summation feature of INA3221, mainly the
> > SCC (enabling) and SF (warning flag) bits of MASK_ENABLE register,
> > INA3221_SHUNT_SUM (summation of shunt voltages) register, and the
> > INA3221_CRIT_SUM (its critical alert setting) register.
> > 
> > Although the summation feature allows user to select which channels
> > to be added to the result, as an initial support, this patch simply
> > selects all channels by default, with one only condition: all shunt
> > resistor values need to be the same. This is because the summation
> > of current channels can be only accurately calculated, using shunt
> > voltage sum register, if all shunt resistors are equivalent.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
> > ---
> > 
> > Hi Guenter,
> > 
> > I know my previous questions haven't been answered yet, so nodes
> > for enabling bits aren't decided completely. But this patch only
> > adds voltage and its current, and we had a conclusion for these
> > two already last time. So I think we may add them first. Thanks!
> > 
> 
> I don't really like the term "summation", as it is the process of
> summing things up, not the result. I'll change "summation of" in
> the documentation to "sum of" and apply the patch.

Thank you!