linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: (coretemp) Introduce enum for attr index

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZW93+OhBNRB+T/EM@a4bf019067fa.jf.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Dec 2023 11:20:24 -0800
From:   Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
To:     "Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>
CC:     "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        "linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org>,
        "ashok_raj@...ux.intel.com" <ashok_raj@...ux.intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "jdelvare@...e.com" <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] hwmon: (coretemp) Introduce enum for attr index

On Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 09:29:24AM -0800, Zhang, Rui wrote:

[snip]

> > 
> > How about 
> > 
> > ATTR_LABEL,
> > ATTR_CRIT_ALARM,
> > ATTR_TEMP,
> > ATTR_TJMAX,
> > MAX_CORE_ATTRS,         /* One more than TJMAX */
> > ATTR_TTARGET = MAX_CORE_ATTRS,
> > TOTAL_ATTRS
> > 
> > Each enum can be assigned any value, but this way they are just
> > increasing
> > order. 
> 
> ATTR_TTARGET is the next attribute after ATTR_TJMAX so it should be
> right after ATTR_TJMAX.
> MAX_CORE_ATTRS is the number of basic attributes so it should be
> ATTR_TJMAX + 1.
> TOTAL_ATTRS is the number of possible attributes so it should be
> ATTR_TTARGET + 1
> 
> ATTR_LABEL,				// 0
> ATTR_CRIT_ALARM,			// 1
> ATTR_TEMP,				// 2
> ATTR_TJMAX,				// 3
> ATTR_TTARGET,				// 4
> MAX_CORE_ATTRS = ATTR_TJMAX + 1,	// 4
> TOTAL_ATTRS = ATTR_TTARGET + 1,		// 5
> 
> How about this one?

Sorry for the delay... yes, this sounds fine.