Abhishek Goel <hunt...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
> @@ -215,7 +216,7 @@ static inline void add_powernv_state(int index, const
> char *name,
> u64 psscr_val, u64 psscr_mask)
> {
> strlcpy(powernv_states[index].name, name, CPUIDLE_NAME_LEN);
> - strlcpy(powernv_states[index].desc, name, CPUIDLE_NAME_LEN);
> + strlcpy(powernv_states[index].desc, desc, CPUIDLE_DESC_LEN);
We should still fall back to using name in the event of desc being null,
as not all firmware will expose the descriptions.
> @@ -311,6 +313,11 @@ static int powernv_add_idle_states(void)
> pr_warn("cpuidle-powernv: missing ibm,cpu-idle-state-names in
> DT\n");
> goto out;
> }
> + if (of_property_read_string_array(power_mgt,
> + "ibm,cpu-idle-state-descs", descs, dt_idle_states) < 0) {
> + pr_warn("cpuidle-powernv: missing ibm,cpu-idle-state-descs in
> DT\n");
> + goto out;
> + }
I don't think pr_warn is appropriate here, as for all current released
firmware we don't have that property. I think perhaps just silently
continuing on is okay, as we have to keep compatibility with that firmware.
> --- a/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> +++ b/include/linux/cpuidle.h
> @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
>
> #define CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX 10
> #define CPUIDLE_NAME_LEN 16
> -#define CPUIDLE_DESC_LEN 32
> +#define CPUIDLE_DESC_LEN 60
Do we really get that long?
--
Stewart Smith
OPAL Architect, IBM.
