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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2022 16:51:58 +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 On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 05:45:25PM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 04:13:03PM +0000, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > Hi Christian, > > > > Thanks for the patch. > > > > I think Andrew's email is offline at the moment. > > > > Notice by gmail spamming me "I CAN'T SEND IT AHHHHH" > Holidy times I guess? Sadly, Andrew's email has done this a number of times - and Andrew used to be on IRC so I could prod him about it, but it seems he doesn't hang out on IRC anymore. It's been like it a few days now. > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:54:28AM +0100, Christian Marangi wrote: > > > @@ -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? > > > > trigger_set first remove any trigger and set the led off. Then apply the > new trigger. So the validation is done only when a trigger is actually > applied. Think we should understand the best case here. I think this is a question that needs to be answered by the LEDs folk, as it's an interface behaviour / quality of implementation issue. > > > @@ -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_ ? > > Agree they are pretty generic so I can see why... My only concern was > making them too long... Maybe reduce them to SW or HW? LEDS_SW_ONLY... > LEDS_SW_CONTROLLED? Seems sensible to me - and as a bonus they get shorter than the above! -- 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