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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <Y5tHjwx1Boj3xMok@shell.armlinux.org.uk> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 16:13:03 +0000 From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk> To: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com> Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, Tim Harvey <tharvey@...eworks.com>, Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tq-group.com>, Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@...vas.dk>, Marek BehĂșn <kabel@...nel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 01/11] leds: add support for hardware driven LEDs Hi Christian, Thanks for the patch. I think Andrew's email is offline at the moment. On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:54:28AM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote: > +static bool led_trigger_is_supported(struct led_classdev *led_cdev, > + struct led_trigger *trigger) > +{ > + switch (led_cdev->blink_mode) { > + case SOFTWARE_CONTROLLED: > + if (trigger->supported_blink_modes == HARDWARE_ONLY) > + return 0; > + break; > + case HARDWARE_CONTROLLED: > + if (trigger->supported_blink_modes == SOFTWARE_ONLY) > + return 0; > + break; > + case SOFTWARE_HARDWARE_CONTROLLED: > + break; > + default: > + return 0; > + } > + > + return 1; Should be returning true/false. I'm not sure I'm a fan of the style of this though - wouldn't the following be easier to read? switch (led_cdev->blink_mode) { case SOFTWARE_CONTROLLED: return trigger->supported_blink_modes != HARDWARE_ONLY; case HARDWARE_CONTROLLED: return trigger->supported_blink_modes != SOFTWARE_ONLY; case SOFTWARE_HARDWARE_CONTROLLED: return true; } ? Also, does it really need a default case - without it, when the led_blink_modes enum is expanded and the switch statement isn't updated, we'll get a compiler warning which will prompt this to be updated - whereas, with a default case, it won't. > @@ -188,6 +213,10 @@ int led_trigger_set(struct led_classdev *led_cdev, struct led_trigger *trig) > led_set_brightness(led_cdev, LED_OFF); > } > if (trig) { > + /* Make sure the trigger support the LED blink mode */ > + if (!led_trigger_is_supported(led_cdev, trig)) > + return -EINVAL; Shouldn't validation happen before we start taking any actions? In other words, before we remove the previous trigger? > @@ -350,12 +381,26 @@ static inline bool led_sysfs_is_disabled(struct led_classdev *led_cdev) > > #define TRIG_NAME_MAX 50 > > +enum led_trigger_blink_supported_modes { > + SOFTWARE_ONLY = SOFTWARE_CONTROLLED, > + HARDWARE_ONLY = HARDWARE_CONTROLLED, > + SOFTWARE_HARDWARE = SOFTWARE_HARDWARE_CONTROLLED, I suspect all these generic names are asking for eventual namespace clashes. Maybe prefix them with LED_ ? Thanks. -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists