linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] usb: typec: tcpci: Added few missing TCPCI register definitions

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, 17 Mar 2021 10:58:24 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] usb: typec: tcpci: Added few missing TCPCI register
 definitions

On 3/17/21 9:42 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 03:52:58PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 3/16/21 3:13 PM, Badhri Jagan Sridharan wrote:
>>> This change adds some of the register bit definitions from the TCPCI spec:
>>> https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/documents/
>>> usb-port_controller_specification_rev2.0_v1.0_0.pdf
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>
>>
>> Are those going to be used ?
> 
> For values and #defines that are in public specs, does it matter?  It's
> good to have full definitions in the .h files for whenever possible for
> stuff like this to make it easy for people to write code to use them :)
> 

Good to know your position on this. It is one of the per-maintainer
thingies: Some maintainers don't accept defines if they are not used.
Usually I stay away from defining them to avoid the resulting arguments/
discussions. If you are ok with it, so am I.

Guenter