linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] firmware: arm_scmi: Simplify enable/disable Clock operations

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, 24 Aug 2023 11:43:35 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        sudeep.holla@....com, james.quinlan@...adcom.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        etienne.carriere@...aro.org, peng.fan@....nxp.com,
        chuck.cannon@....com, souvik.chakravarty@....com,
        nicola.mazzucato@....com,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] firmware: arm_scmi: Simplify enable/disable Clock operations

Quoting Cristian Marussi (2023-08-24 07:25:21)
> On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:01:17AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > 
> > Perhaps we need a local variable to make it more readable.
> > 
> >       static int scmi_clk_enable(struct clk_hw *hw)
> >       {
> >              bool can_sleep = false;
> >              struct scmi_clk *clk = to_scmi_clk(hw);
> > 
> >              return scmi_proto_clk_ops->enable(clk->ph, clk->id, can_sleep);
> >       }
> > 
> > This let's the reader quickly understand what the parameter means. I'm
> > OK with adding the function parameter, but a plain 'true' or 'false'
> > doesn't help with clarity.
> 
> Thanks for the suggestion, it would help definitely making it more
> readable, maybe a local define or enum could make it without even
> putting anything on the stack.
> 

Surely the compiler can optimize that so there isn't stack local
storage for a local variable used as an argument to a function call?