Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:03:08 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 6/9] iwlwifi: mvm: Set THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP directly |
| |
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 11:31 AM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote: > > On Fri, 2024-02-09 at 17:15 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > > for (i = 0 ; i < IWL_MAX_DTS_TRIPS; i++) { > > > > mvm->tz_device.trips[i].temperature = THERMAL_TEMP_INVALID; > > > > mvm->tz_device.trips[i].type = THERMAL_TRIP_PASSIVE; > > > > + mvm->tz_device.trips[i].type = THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP; > > > > > > mvm->tz_device.trips[i].flags = THERMAL_TRIP_WRITABLE_TEMP; > > > > > > Consider using diffrent prefix for constants to diffrenciate flags and types. > > > > Well, I can use THERMAL_TRIP_FLAG_RW_TEMP or similar, but is it really > > so confusing? > > > > I'm wondering what others think. > > > > I'd tend to agree with Stanislaw. I did (eventually) notice the double > assignment to .type above, but had that not been visible in the context, > or you'd have removed the first one by accident, I'd really not have > thought about it twice. > > The bug also makes it look like you even confused yourself ;-)
No, that's just a mistake.
> So having a clearer indication that it's a flag would make sense, I'd say.
Sure, thanks!
| |