From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752124AbeAEOoS (ORCPT + 1 other); Fri, 5 Jan 2018 09:44:18 -0500 Received: from mail-qk0-f196.google.com ([209.85.220.196]:38193 "EHLO mail-qk0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751983AbeAEOoO (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Jan 2018 09:44:14 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosn/E9H+/qSjjfP5Og5rAo4YV99doUpbDwxGzQueQ6mSDiUbsM5bqZ4A/z15d2RqXwolgaRZAtvkiPLMaiCdCo= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8e1b17a4da0d404eb36920297e408d9f@ausx13mpc120.AMER.DELL.COM> References: <2dfbb122aa11fa9ff73cbfc6a403b82d1bb2e7c8.1508434514.git.mario.limonciello@dell.com> <20180105111313.23c6vjs2x3fhtvi4@pali> <8e1b17a4da0d404eb36920297e408d9f@ausx13mpc120.AMER.DELL.COM> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 16:44:13 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 12/15] platform/x86: dell-smbios: Add filtering support To: Mario Limonciello Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= , Darren Hart , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Platform Driver , Andy Lutomirski , quasisec@google.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , mjg59@google.com, Christoph Hellwig , Greg KH , One Thousand Gnomes Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:32 PM, wrote: >> I know that this patch is already applied and merged, but I spotted this >> problem: >> >> On Thursday 19 October 2017 12:50:15 Mario Limonciello wrote: >> > +/* calls that are explicitly blacklisted */ >> > +static struct smbios_call call_blacklist[] = { >> > + {0x0000, 01, 07}, /* manufacturing use */ >> > + {0x0000, 06, 05}, /* manufacturing use */ >> > + {0x0000, 11, 03}, /* write once */ >> > + {0x0000, 11, 07}, /* write once */ >> >> Numbers prefixed by zero means that they are in octal notation, right? > Is that how the kernel interprets an integer prefix by zero? No, compiler. > I prefixed by zero for readability, they're supposed to be decimal. ...which make a confusion. Luckily you don't have 8 and 9 there, otherwise I even don't know if it would be a compilation warning. >> This can lead to misunderstanding, confusion or problems in future... >> >> Can we have all numbers either in hexadecimal or decimal notation? > > Could you elaborate more why this is problematic the way it is? > Are you meaning you would rather see this? > {0x0000, 1, 7}, /* manufacturing use */ > {0x0000, 6, 5}, /* manufacturing use */ > {0x0000, 11, 3}, /* write once */ > {0x0000, 11, 7}, /* write once */ I think something like that. You might use white space for indentation. > > That seems less readable to me but should interpret the same way. > > Perhaps it would be better if you submit a patch with what is clearer to > you. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko