linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] power: supply: lenovo_yoga_c630

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: <vc5nd5dl4czkuxzikazn7ndy6wghlchqsrcgxf7n5w53w3o3m2@spyfgp5pwy4y>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 02:15:59 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Oliver Neukum <oneukum@...e.com>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, 
	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>, Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>, 
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, 
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Nikita Travkin <nikita@...n.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] power: supply: lenovo_yoga_c630_battery: add
 Lenovo C630 driver

On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 02:26:36PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On 27.05.24 12:03, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> > +struct yoga_c630_psy {
> > +	struct yoga_c630_ec *ec;
> > +	struct device *dev;
> > +	struct device_node *of_node;
> > +	struct notifier_block nb;
> > +	struct mutex lock;
> > +
> > +	struct power_supply *adp_psy;
> > +	struct power_supply *bat_psy;
> > +
> > +	unsigned long last_status_update;
> > +
> > +	bool adapter_online;
> > +
> > +	bool unit_mA;
> > +
> > +	unsigned int scale;
> 
> why do you store unit_mA and scale? This looks redundant and like a source
> of confusion to me.

Here we just followed the AML code in ACPI tables. The unit_mA is a
returned from the_BIX method, the 'scale' is used internally in the DSDT.
If you think that it's better, I can change all '* scale * 1000' to
'if unit_mA then foo = bar * 10000 else foo = bar * 1000'.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry