linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] lan78xx: Remove trailing underscores from macros

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 06 Sep 2016 19:13:14 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Ronnie.Kunin@...rochip.com, Woojung.Huh@...rochip.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     f.fainelli@...il.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] lan78xx: Remove trailing underscores from macros

On Wed, 2016-09-07 at 02:00 +0000, Ronnie.Kunin@...rochip.com wrote:
> Microchip's internal convention is for register (offset) definitions
> to be capitalized (i.e.: MY_REGISTER). Our convention for bits
> (position) definitions within a register is to carry as a prefix the
> name of the register and suffix it with the bit name and adding a
> trailing underscore (i.e. MY_REGISTER_MY_BIT_). The trailing
> underscore is what easily lets us distinguish a bit from a register
> definition when reading code. We have been using this convention for
> many years and has worked very well for us across all projects (by now
> hundreds).

I think it's kind of an ugly convention, but <shrug> no
skin off my nose really.

> > Is there anything other than a one-time cost
> > to apply these?  Is the same code used for
> > other platforms?
> 
> Yes, a single header file with the definition of registers and bits is
> shared (either as a standalone file or with its contents pasted into a
> native environment "carrier" header file) across all drivers (and
> other non driver software projects as well) for the same device. So a
> change like this indeed has a high cost for Microchip and we'd rather
> not do this unless it is an absolutely mandated requirement. 

No worries, if you don't like it, don't apply it.

Send a NAK too so David Miller doesn't apply it either.