linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] wilc1000: Add reset/enable GPIO support to SPI 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:   Thu, 16 Dec 2021 08:26:22 -0700
From:   David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@...uge.net>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
Cc:     Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com, Ajay.Kathat@...rochip.com,
        adham.abozaeid@...rochip.com, davem@...emloft.net,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] wilc1000: Add reset/enable GPIO support to SPI
 driver

On Thu, 2021-12-16 at 10:10 +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> David Mosberger-Tang <davidm@...uge.net> writes:
> 
> > > > +       } else {
> > > > +               gpiod_set_value(gpios->reset, 1);       /* assert RESET */
> > > > +               gpiod_set_value(gpios->enable, 0);      /* deassert ENABLE */
> > > 
> > > I don't usually see comments near the code line in kernel. Maybe move them
> > > before the actual code line or remove them at all as the code is impler enough?
> > 
> > You're kidding, right?
> 
> I agree with Claudiu, the comments are not really providing more
> information from what can be seen from the code. And the style of having
> the comment in the same line is not commonly used in upstream.

The code is obvious if you think of 1 as "assert" and 0 as "deassert".  It looks
utterly wrong if you think of 1 as outputting 3.3V and 0 as outputting 0V.

But if you insist, I'll remove the comments.

  --david