linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] software node: Power management operations for software nodes

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: <20201029121751.GK4077@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:17:51 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] software node: Power management operations for
 software nodes

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:51:13PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 01:13:03PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > These functions are doing pretty much the same thing but with different
> > parameters. How about implementing a macro or a few, which would take all
> > the parameters as arguments and return the function to call? A few variants
> > may be needed. Individual functions performing different tasks would become
> > very simple.
> 
> I would prefer to do that as the second step, if you guys don't mind.
> I think this was already talked about, but maybe only internally.
> Those macros should then be used also in other places where the same
> steps are being executed, for example in drivers/base/power/domain.c.

I agree.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko