linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] trigger: ledtrig-tty: add additional modes

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4e8661601efcdcf8b5a42de8c80ac7d8@dev.tdt.de>
Date:   Mon, 06 Mar 2023 08:13:35 +0100
From:   Florian Eckert <fe@....tdt.de>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, pavel@....cz,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org,
        Eckert.Florian@...glemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] trigger: ledtrig-tty: add additional modes



On 2023-03-06 07:57, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 03. 03. 23, 15:11, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Feb 2023, Florian Eckert wrote:
>>> @@ -113,21 +207,38 @@ static void ledtrig_tty_work(struct work_struct 
>>> *work)
>>>   		trigger_data->tty = tty;
>>>   	}
>>>   -	ret = tty_get_icount(trigger_data->tty, &icount);
>>> -	if (ret) {
>>> -		dev_info(trigger_data->tty->dev, "Failed to get icount, stopped 
>>> polling\n");
>>> -		mutex_unlock(&trigger_data->mutex);
>>> -		return;
>>> -	}
>>> -
>>> -	if (icount.rx != trigger_data->rx ||
>>> -	    icount.tx != trigger_data->tx) {
>>> -		led_set_brightness_sync(trigger_data->led_cdev, LED_ON);
>>> -
>>> -		trigger_data->rx = icount.rx;
>>> -		trigger_data->tx = icount.tx;
>>> -	} else {
>>> -		led_set_brightness_sync(trigger_data->led_cdev, LED_OFF);
>>> +	switch (trigger_data->mode) {
>>> +	case TTY_LED_CTS:
>>> +		ledtrig_tty_flags(trigger_data, TIOCM_CTS);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case TTY_LED_DSR:
>>> +		ledtrig_tty_flags(trigger_data, TIOCM_DSR);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case TTY_LED_CAR:
>>> +		ledtrig_tty_flags(trigger_data, TIOCM_CAR);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case TTY_LED_RNG:
>>> +		ledtrig_tty_flags(trigger_data, TIOCM_RNG);
>>> +		break;
>>> +	case TTY_LED_CNT:
>> 
>> I believe this requires a 'fall-through' statement.
> 
> I don't think this is the case. Isn't fallthrough required only in
> cases when there is at least one statement, i.e. a block?

Jiri thanks for the advice

I also understood that I only need the /* Fall through */ comment if I 
also have at least one statement.
Which is not the case there. So I would say that fits.

For all other things, I am in the process of fixing that and sending a 
v8 patchset.

> 
>> Documentation/process/deprecated.rst
>> 
>>> +	default:
>>> +		ret = tty_get_icount(trigger_data->tty, &icount);
>>> +		if (ret) {
>>> +			dev_info(trigger_data->tty->dev, "Failed to get icount, stopped 
>>> polling\n");
>>> +			mutex_unlock(&trigger_data->mutex);
>>> +			return;
>>> +		}
>>> +