On 12/21/2014 04:09 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Sunday 21 December 2014 12:57:08 Guenter Roeck wrote:
-#define I8K_FAN_MULT 30
+#define I8K_FAN_MAX_RPM 30000
#define I8K_MAX_TEMP 127
#define I8K_FN_NONE 0x00
@@ -64,7 +66,7 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(i8k_mutex);
static char bios_version[4];
static struct device *i8k_hwmon_dev;
static u32 i8k_hwmon_flags;
-static int i8k_fan_mult;
+static int i8k_fan_mult = 30;
Why did you drop I8K_FAN_MULT ?
Because I think it is not needed anymore... It is used only in
one place (there ^). But if you want I can revert it back.
That is not a reason to drop a define.
static int __init i8k_probe(void)
{
+ const struct i8k_config_data *conf;
Why did you move this variable declaration ?
Comes from previous version of patches where I moved all
variables to start of function. I will revert this change.
- const struct i8k_config_data *conf = id->driver_data;
+ conf = id->driver_data;
+ if (fan_mult <= 0 && conf->fan_mult > 0)
I still don't see the value in accepting fan_mult < 0
(compeared to == 0).
Ok. What kernel driver should do if user load it with negative
parameter? We should not propagate negative value to functions.
You have multiple options: Ignore it (bad idea ;-), abort loading
the module with -EINVAL, or make the module parameter an unsigned.
I would prefer the latter. Either case, that should be a separate patch
(different logical change).
Thanks,
Guenter
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
