linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] leds: trigger: implement block trigger

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: <20210430221121.46461c81@thinkpad>
Date:   Fri, 30 Apr 2021 22:11:21 +0200
From:   Marek Behun <marek.behun@....cz>
To:     Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@...e.de>
Cc:     linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] leds: trigger: implement block trigger

On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 15:32:11 -0300
Enzo Matsumiya <ematsumiya@...e.de> wrote:

> Activity is then represented in an accumulated manner (part_read_stat_accum()),
> with a fixed blinking interval of 50ms.

part_stat_read_accum, not part_read_stat_accum

Why only accum? With the netdev trigger, you can choose whether rx, tx,
or both are blinking the LED.

Also I think the trigger should be called "blockdev" instead of
"block". This is consistent with "netdev", and avoids misinterpretation
with the verb "to block".

Marek