linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] ACPI: CPPC: Adjust return code for inline functions in !CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC

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: <ZtnCKu/zOltj5mZb@BLRRASHENOY1.amd.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 20:07:30 +0530
From: "Gautham R. Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>
To: Mario Limonciello <superm1@...nel.org>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Perry Yuan <perry.yuan@....com>,
	"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:ACPI" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:CPU FREQUENCY SCALING FRAMEWORK" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/11] ACPI: CPPC: Adjust return code for inline
 functions in !CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB

On Tue, Sep 03, 2024 at 03:36:52PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> From: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>
> 
> Checkpath emits the following warning:
> ```
> WARNING: ENOTSUPP is not a SUSV4 error code, prefer EOPNOTSUPP
> ```
> 
> Adjust the code accordingly.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@....com>

Reviewed-by: Gautham R. Shenoy <gautham.shenoy@....com>


> ---
>  include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h b/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
> index 930b6afba6f4d..409a7190a4a86 100644
> --- a/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
> +++ b/include/acpi/cppc_acpi.h
> @@ -162,31 +162,31 @@ extern int cppc_set_auto_sel(int cpu, bool enable);
>  #else /* !CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
>  static inline int cppc_get_desired_perf(int cpunum, u64 *desired_perf)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_nominal_perf(int cpunum, u64 *nominal_perf)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_highest_perf(int cpunum, u64 *highest_perf)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_perf_ctrs(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_fb_ctrs *perf_fb_ctrs)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_set_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_set_enable(int cpu, bool enable)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_perf_caps(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_caps *caps)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline bool cppc_perf_ctrs_in_pcc(void)
>  {
> @@ -210,27 +210,27 @@ static inline bool cpc_ffh_supported(void)
>  }
>  static inline int cpc_read_ffh(int cpunum, struct cpc_reg *reg, u64 *val)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cpc_write_ffh(int cpunum, struct cpc_reg *reg, u64 val)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_set_epp_perf(int cpu, struct cppc_perf_ctrls *perf_ctrls, bool enable)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_epp_perf(int cpunum, u64 *epp_perf)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_set_auto_sel(int cpu, bool enable)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  static inline int cppc_get_auto_sel_caps(int cpunum, struct cppc_perf_caps *perf_caps)
>  {
> -	return -ENOTSUPP;
> +	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>  }
>  #endif /* !CONFIG_ACPI_CPPC_LIB */
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0
>