Re: git: 548ada00e54a - main - LinuxKPI: add bcd.h

On Mon, 2021-10-25 at 21:17 +0000, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021, Ian Lepore wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2021-10-25 at 20:23 +0000, Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> > > The branch main has been updated by bz:
> > > 
> > > URL:
> > > https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=548ada00e54a9e7745d041b1ec7f68f3bd493365
> > > 
> > > commit 548ada00e54a9e7745d041b1ec7f68f3bd493365
> > > Author:     Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@FreeBSD.org>
> > > AuthorDate: 2021-10-25 18:14:08 +0000
> > > Commit:     Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@FreeBSD.org>
> > > CommitDate: 2021-10-25 20:20:53 +0000
> > > 
> > >     LinuxKPI: add bcd.h
> > >    
> > >     Add bcd2bin() as linuxkpi_bcd2bin().  Libkern does provide a
> > > bcd2bin()
> > > 
> > > [...]
> > > + * We could use libkern, but we need the argument truncating.
> > > + *
> > 
> > 
> > What does that mean, "we need the argument truncating"?
> 
> This one takes an uint8_t as argument.
> 
> If my memory serves me correctly the Linux driver code through
> macros passes in larger values 0xabcdxx which are truncated by
> the argument type.
> 
> We take an int and then have a KASSERT() which doesn't work so well
> for these larger values.
> 
> /bz
> 
> -- 
> Bjoern A. Zeeb                                                    
> r15:7

I had forgotten that we added a KASSERT a few years ago.  But we don't
expect linux to be relying on getting bad answers in response to bad
inputs, do we?

I wonder why we can't just change the prototype of our inline function
from int to uint8_t and remove the >= 0 part from the assert?

-- Ian