linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 02/14] serial: core: Add UPIO

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: <fa46f220-a1c4-43f4-91e1-5929ff335be0@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 06:42:15 +0100
From: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
 Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>,
 Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>, Ray Jui
 <rjui@...adcom.com>, Scott Branden <sbranden@...adcom.com>,
 Broadcom internal kernel review list
 <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>, Al Cooper <alcooperx@...il.com>,
 Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
 Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>, Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@...ia.com>,
 Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
 Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
 Kunihiko Hayashi <hayashi.kunihiko@...ionext.com>,
 Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 02/14] serial: core: Add UPIO_UNSET constant for unset
 port type

On 22. 02. 24, 14:21, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 07:58:32AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote:
>> On 21. 02. 24, 19:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
> ...
> 
>>>    	unsigned char		iotype;			/* io access style */
>>> +#define UPIO_UNSET		((unsigned char)~0U)	/* UCHAR_MAX */
>>
>> Perhaps making the var u8 and this U8_MAX then? It would make more sense to
>> me.
> 
> WFM, should it be a separate change?

Likely.

> Btw, how can I justify it?

Hmm, thinking about it, why is it not an enum?

But it could be also an u8 because you want it be exactly 8 bits as you 
want to be sure values up to 255 fit.

thanks,
-- 
js
suse labs