linux-kernel - [PATCH v2 4/5] rtc: rtc-cmos: Rename ACPI-related functions

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: <3225614.44csPzL39Z@kreacher>
Date:   Wed, 09 Nov 2022 13:12:00 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 4/5] rtc: rtc-cmos: Rename ACPI-related functions

From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>

The names of rtc_wake_setup() and cmos_wake_setup() don't indicate
that these functions are ACPI-related, which is the case, and the
former doesn't really reflect the role of the function.

Rename them to acpi_rtc_event_setup() and acpi_cmos_wake_setup(),
respectively, to address this shortcoming.

No intentional functional impact.

Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
---

v1 -> v2:
   * Use acpi_cmos_wake_setup() as the new name instead of
     cmos_acpi_wake_setup() (Andy)

---
 drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c |   12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

Index: linux-pm/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/rtc/rtc-cmos.c
@@ -784,7 +784,7 @@ static u32 rtc_handler(void *context)
 	return ACPI_INTERRUPT_HANDLED;
 }
 
-static void rtc_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
+static void acpi_rtc_event_setup(struct device *dev)
 {
 	if (acpi_disabled)
 		return;
@@ -828,7 +828,7 @@ static void use_acpi_alarm_quirks(void)
 static inline void use_acpi_alarm_quirks(void) { }
 #endif
 
-static void cmos_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
+static void acpi_cmos_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
 {
 	if (acpi_disabled)
 		return;
@@ -880,11 +880,11 @@ static void cmos_check_acpi_rtc_status(s
 
 #else /* !CONFIG_ACPI */
 
-static inline void rtc_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
+static inline void acpi_rtc_event_setup(struct device *dev)
 {
 }
 
-static inline void cmos_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
+static inline void acpi_cmos_wake_setup(struct device *dev)
 {
 }
 
@@ -986,7 +986,7 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct
 			cmos_rtc.wake_off = info->wake_off;
 		}
 	} else {
-		cmos_wake_setup(dev);
+		acpi_cmos_wake_setup(dev);
 	}
 
 	if (cmos_rtc.day_alrm >= 128)
@@ -1091,7 +1091,7 @@ cmos_do_probe(struct device *dev, struct
 	 * the ACPI RTC fixed event.
 	 */
 	if (!info)
-		rtc_wake_setup(dev);
+		acpi_rtc_event_setup(dev);
 
 	dev_info(dev, "%s%s, %d bytes nvram%s\n",
 		 !is_valid_irq(rtc_irq) ? "no alarms" :