linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv1] ARM: imx: Add support for low power suspend on MX51.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 3 Mar 2011 12:49:49 +0100
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	linux@....linux.org.uk, Dinh.Nguyen@...escale.com,
	s.hauer@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	xiao-lizhang@...escale.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv1] ARM: imx: Add support for low power suspend on MX51.

Hello Thomas,

On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:02:15PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Mar 2011, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 12:51:32AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > > +static int __init mx5_pm_init(void)
> > > > I'd prefer to have that called by imx51_init_early.
> > > 
> > > And the reason is? 
> > > 
> > >     1) your personal preference
> > >     2) there is some useful technical reason
> > > 
> > > If #1, then this comment was just waste of electrons
> > > If #2, you failed to provide some reasonable explanation
> > Actually it's #2, and to quote a different review[1]:
> > 
> > 	Reviewers hint to a correct solution and you are supposed to
> > 	lookup what that solution means and act accordingly. If you do
> > 	not understand the hint or its implications please ask [...]
> 
> I said the above when I hinted to use DEFINE_SPINLOCK(lock) instead of
> static spinlock_t lock. And that requires to lookup what
> DEFINE_SPINLOCK() actually does, which is a reasonable request.
> 
> How is the author of that code supposed to figure out what the merit
> of s/mx5_pm_init/imx51_init_early/ is? By looking up your preferences
> in google or what?
Note I didn't suggest to change the function name.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/