linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] counter: Introduce the COUNTER_COMP

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: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 09:41:14 +0100
From: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>
To: William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>
CC: <syednwaris@...il.com>, <vigneshr@...com>, <jpanis@...libre.com>,
        <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] counter: Introduce the COUNTER_COMP_FREQUENCY() macro

On 3/1/24 16:55, William Breathitt Gray wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 11:25:05AM +0100, Fabrice Gasnier wrote:
>> Now that there are two users for the "frequency" extension, introduce a
>> new COUNTER_COMP_FREQUENCY() macro.
>> This extension is intended to be a read-only signal attribute.
>>
>> Suggested-by: William Breathitt Gray <william.gray@...aro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v5
>> - "frequency" extension is read-only, so there's no need to provide
>>   a write parameter.
>> - patch sent separately from "counter: Add stm32 timer events support" [1]
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240227173803.53906-2-fabrice.gasnier@foss.st.com/
>> ---
>>  include/linux/counter.h | 7 +++++++
>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/counter.h b/include/linux/counter.h
>> index 702e9108bbb4..0ac36f815b7d 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/counter.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/counter.h
>> @@ -602,6 +602,13 @@ struct counter_array {
>>  #define COUNTER_COMP_FLOOR(_read, _write) \
>>  	COUNTER_COMP_COUNT_U64("floor", _read, _write)
>>  
>> +#define COUNTER_COMP_FREQUENCY(_read) \
>> +{ \
>> +	.type = COUNTER_COMP_U64, \
>> +	.name = "frequency", \
>> +	.signal_u64_read = (_read), \
>> +}
>> +
>>  #define COUNTER_COMP_POLARITY(_read, _write, _available) \
>>  { \
>>  	.type = COUNTER_COMP_SIGNAL_POLARITY, \
>> -- 
>> 2.25.1
> 
> Hi Fabrice,
> 
> Setting the structure members directly works, but why not use
> COUNTER_COMP_SIGNAL_U64("frequency", _read, NULL) instead to keep the
> code more succinct?

Hi William,

I originally wrote it this way, but I had a doubt since some macros use
the structure members directly.

I can update to use COUNTER_COMP_SIGNAL_U64() instead, that will spare
few lines.

Please let me know what you prefer (I guess your proposal above ?).

Best Regards,
Thanks,
Fabrice

> 
> William Breathitt Gray