Re: [patch 08/12] thermal: add sanity check for the passive attribute

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tuesday 17 November 2009, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> As noted before, I'm not a fan of this approach - I can't think of many
> reasons why it'd be necessary to use temperatures below 1 degree C, but
> this constraint isn't present anywhere else in the thermal code and,
> really, there's plenty of things that people can break if they just echo
> incorrect values into /sys.

Personally I'd be in favor of adding more sanity checks rather than 
removing them. The cost of the check is virtually zero.

Cheers,
FJP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux