linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] platform/x86: hp-wmi: add manual fan control for Victus S models

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: <aWU5Mf89hTifpewY@archlinux>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 23:47:15 +0530
From: Krishna Chomal <krishna.chomal108@...il.com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>, linux@...ck-us.net, 
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] platform/x86: hp-wmi: add manual fan control for
 Victus S models

On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 08:08:29PM +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jan 2026, Krishna Chomal wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 12, 2026 at 05:13:05PM +0200, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>> > On Tue, 30 Dec 2025, Krishna Chomal wrote:
>> >
>> [snip]
>> > >  #include <linux/string.h>
>> > >  #include <linux/dmi.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/fixp-arith.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/limits.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/minmax.h>
>> > > +#include <linux/compiler_attributes.h>
>> > >
>> [snip]
>
>Hmm, these should be ordered alphabetically and if the existing one
>aren't, try your best (or add a patch to fix the order for all).
>

Ok, then I will add a separate patch to this series to fix the ordering
for all includes.

>> > > +
>> > > +struct victus_s_fan_table_header {
>> > > +	u8 unknown;
>> > > +	u8 num_entries;
>> > > +} __packed;
>> >
>> > Please add #include for __packed.
>> >
>>
>> __packed is defined in compiler_attributes.h, which is included in this
>> patch. Please let me know if there are any other headers that should be
>> included.
>
>Sorry, I don't know why I didn't notice it (too much reviewing in a row or
>too much multi-tasking I guess :-)).
>

No problem, I understand. Thanks for the quick feedback.