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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2017 08:43:54 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-nilfs@...r.kernel.org, cluster-devel@...hat.com,
        Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] block_dev: Rename bd_fsfreeze_mutex

On 09/18/2017 07:47 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Don't rename it to a way to long name.  Either add a separate mutex
> for your purpose (unless there is interaction between freezing and
> blktrace, which I doubt), or properly comment the usage.

I would agree with you if the long name causes the expressions hard to
read. In this particular case, it is just the single parameter to the
mutex_lock() and mutex_unlock() functions. There is no confusion and
overly long lines. So I think it is OK. In fact, I got the opposite
advices in the past that some people prefer long descriptive names than
short and cryptic names.

Cheers,
Longman

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ