[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200523064841.GJ11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2020 06:48:41 +0000
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
BCM Kernel Feedback <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware_loader: change enum fw_opt to u32
On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 08:05:48AM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 11:00:25PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 03:49:05PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> > > Hi Luis,
> > >
> > > On 2020-05-22 3:45 p.m., Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 02:46:58PM -0700, Scott Branden wrote:
> > > > > /**
> > > > > - * enum fw_opt - options to control firmware loading behaviour
> > > > > + * fw_opt - options to control firmware loading behaviour
> > > > > *
> > > > > * @FW_OPT_UEVENT: Enables the fallback mechanism to send a kobject uevent
> > > > > * when the firmware is not found. Userspace is in charge to load the
> > > > > @@ -33,15 +33,13 @@
> > > > > * the platform's main firmware. If both this fallback and the sysfs
> > > > > * fallback are enabled, then this fallback will be tried first.
> > > > > */
> > > > > -enum fw_opt {
> > > > > - FW_OPT_UEVENT = BIT(0),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_NOWAIT = BIT(1),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_USERHELPER = BIT(2),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_NO_WARN = BIT(3),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_NOCACHE = BIT(4),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_NOFALLBACK_SYSFS = BIT(5),
> > > > > - FW_OPT_FALLBACK_PLATFORM = BIT(6),
> > > > > -};
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_UEVENT BIT(0)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_NOWAIT BIT(1)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_USERHELPER BIT(2)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_NO_WARN BIT(3)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_NOCACHE BIT(4)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_NOFALLBACK_SYSFS BIT(5)
> > > > > +#define FW_OPT_FALLBACK_PLATFORM BIT(6)
> > > > Everything looked good up to here. The enum defines each flag.
> > > > We just want to use an enum for *one* flag represetnation, not
> > > > a bundle.
> > >
> > > I do not know exactly what you are looking for then. The FW_OPT_*
> > > values are OR'd together in the code. You still want the fw_opt enum
> > > above left in place entirely and then the values used in OR'd
> > > together?
> >
> > Yes, exactly. If they are combined then we just use a u32 to represent
> > these are then flags combined. An enum represents just *one* flag, not
> > a set which are OR'd together. Let me know if this is still not clear.
>
> If this is the case, why have an enum at all? What difference is it
> from a #define like was done here?
If used on a switch to test for cases the compiler will error if you
miss one, and it is easier to use kdoc for them.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists