linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 3/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Post-increment variables when getting constraints

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: <404044b2-8e7a-4420-9c10-b2ca75d7e3aa@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 19:42:19 -0700
From:   Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
        <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Iain Lane <iain@...ngesquash.org.uk>,
        Shyam-sundar S-k <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 3/9] ACPI: x86: s2idle: Post-increment variables when
 getting constraints


On 8/16/2023 1:41 PM, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> There is no reason for the variables to be pre-incremented.
> No intended functional changes.
>
> Suggested-by: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
> ---

I think you need to explain bit more in commit log.  Otherwise, looks good.

Reviewed-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan 
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>

>   drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c | 8 ++++----
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
> index ce62e61a9605e..7711dde68947f 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
> @@ -123,13 +123,13 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints_amd(void)
>   			acpi_handle_debug(lps0_device_handle,
>   					  "LPI: constraints list begin:\n");
>   
> -			for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; ++j) {
> +			for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; j++) {
>   				union acpi_object *info_obj = &package->package.elements[j];
>   				struct lpi_device_constraint_amd dev_info = {};
>   				struct lpi_constraints *list;
>   				acpi_status status;
>   
> -				for (k = 0; k < info_obj->package.count; ++k) {
> +				for (k = 0; k < info_obj->package.count; k++) {
>   					union acpi_object *obj = &info_obj->package.elements[k];
>   
>   					list = &lpi_constraints_table[lpi_constraints_table_size];
> @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints(void)
>   		if (!package)
>   			continue;
>   
> -		for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; ++j) {
> +		for (j = 0; j < package->package.count; j++) {
>   			union acpi_object *element =
>   					&(package->package.elements[j]);
>   
> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static void lpi_device_get_constraints(void)
>   
>   		constraint->min_dstate = -1;
>   
> -		for (j = 0; j < package_count; ++j) {
> +		for (j = 0; j < package_count; j++) {
>   			union acpi_object *info_obj = &info.package[j];
>   			union acpi_object *cnstr_pkg;
>   			union acpi_object *obj;