linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 4/7] iio: accel: adxl345: add inactivity feature

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VfOKDZRoVWLQoPQPzpN2MceTeN_4OoU0RvxG7_J8OAoMw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2025 10:30:15 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Lothar Rubusch <l.rubusch@...il.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>, lars@...afoo.de, 
	Michael.Hennerich@...log.com, dlechner@...libre.com, nuno.sa@...log.com, 
	andy@...nel.org, corbet@....net, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, eraretuya@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/7] iio: accel: adxl345: add inactivity feature

On Sun, Jun 29, 2025 at 12:11 AM Lothar Rubusch <l.rubusch@...il.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2025 at 6:08 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org> wrote:

...

> > > > +           axis_ctrl = ADXL345_INACT_X_EN | ADXL345_INACT_Y_EN |
> > > > +                           ADXL345_INACT_Z_EN;
> > >
> > > Consider
> > >               axis_ctrl =
> > >                       ADXL345_INACT_X_EN | ADXL345_INACT_Y_EN | ADXL345_INACT_Z_EN;
> > >
> > > (yes, I see that it's longer than 80, but it might worth doing it for the sake of
> > >  consistency with the previous suggestion).
> > Hmm. I'd go longer rather than do that just because it looks really ugly.
> >
> >                 axis_ctrl = ADXL345_INACT_X_EN | ADXL345_INACT_Y_EN | ADXL345_INACT_Z_EN;
> >
> > I don't care that much as long as long lines are justified by readability. Here
> > I think either Andy's suggestion or the all on one line are justified.
> >
> > Tomorrow I may have a different view :(
> >
>
> As I’ve seen quite a bit of discussion around this. In fact, using
> binary OR here might not even be necessary, since I can define
> ADXL345_ACT_XYZ_EN and ADXL345_INACT_XYZ_EN directly and OR the fields
> in the header. If you have no objections, I’ll likely prepare this
> change for the next version.

Actually I like your idea. This will be sustainable over style
preference changes.


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko