linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/13] gpiolib: add gpiods_set_array_value

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: <CACRpkdads3+XQqvZDJXmYHDLGfRK0H_S==72uqkuht2nEX1+rQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2025 23:45:53 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, 
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, 
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, 
	Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>, Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, 
	Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, 
	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...nel.org>, Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>, 
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
	Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] gpiolib: add gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep

Hi David,

On Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 9:24 PM David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com> wrote:

> This series was inspired by some minor annoyance I have experienced a
> few times in recent reviews.
>
> Calling gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep() can be quite verbose due to
> having so many parameters. In most cases, we already have a struct
> gpio_descs that contains the first 3 parameters so we end up with 3 (or
> often even 6) pointer indirections at each call site. Also, people have
> a tendency to want to hard-code the first argument instead of using
> struct gpio_descs.ndescs, often without checking that ndescs >= the
> hard-coded value.
>
> So I'm proposing that we add a gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep()
> function that is a wrapper around gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep()
> that has struct gpio_descs as the first parameter to make it a bit
> easier to read the code and avoid the hard-coding temptation.
>
> I've just done gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep() for now since there
> were over 10 callers of this one. There aren't as many callers of
> the get and atomic variants, but we can add those too if this seems
> like a useful thing to do.

I like it.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>

for the series.

Yours,
Linus Walleij