linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] clk: sifive: Add pcie_aux clock in prci driver for PCIe driver

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:   Tue, 4 May 2021 13:45:55 -0500
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greentime Hu <greentime.hu@...ive.com>, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
        hes@...ive.com, erik.danie@...ive.com, zong.li@...ive.com,
        bhelgaas@...gle.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
        alex.dewar90@...il.com, khilman@...libre.com,
        hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com, vidyas@...dia.com,
        jh80.chung@...sung.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/6] clk: sifive: Add pcie_aux clock in prci driver
 for PCIe driver

On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 09:12:57PM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Tue, May 04, 2021 at 11:23:31AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:

> > There are some weird/interesting bool vs int usages nearby, though:
> > 
> >   "bool __is_clk_gate_enabled()" goes to some trouble to convert
> >   int to bool ("return (reg_val & bit_mask) != 0;"), and then
> >   kona_peri_clk_is_enabled() converts the bool back to int ("return
> >   is_clk_gate_enabled(bcm_clk->ccu, gate) ? 1 : 0;").
> > 
> >   "int lpc32xx_clk_gate_is_enabled()" actually returns a bool that is
> >   implicitly converted to int.
> > 
> >   Many *_is_enabled() functions return !!(...) where !! is an
> >   int-to-bool conversion that is arguably unnecessary and again
> >   results in an implicit conversion to int.
> > 
> > I don't see any *problems* with any of these; it just seems like a
> > little more mental effort to think about all the explicit and implicit
> > conversions going on.
> 
> The code is written once but read many times and I can't agree with
> your that examples given by you are not the *problems*. They clearly
> says "the API is not great and easily can be improved".

I certainly agree that it's easier for readers if the style is
consistent.  I just meant I didn't see anything that's an actual bug.  

Bjorn