linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/12] making the kernel -Wshadow clean

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]

Message-ID: <m3wt9vj94n.fsf@defiant.localdomain>
Date:	Sun, 30 Jul 2006 19:27:36 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To:	"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@...l.org>,
	"Nikita Danilov" <nikita@...sterfs.com>,
	"Joe Perches" <joe@...ches.com>,
	"Martin Waitz" <tali@...ingilde.org>,
	"Jan-Benedict Glaw" <jbglaw@...-owl.de>,
	"Christoph Hellwig" <hch@...radead.org>,
	"David Woodhouse" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"Arjan van de Ven" <arjan@...radead.org>,
	"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	"Valdis Kletnieks" <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
	"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@...nborg.org>,
	"Russell King" <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
	"Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	"Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] making the kernel -Wshadow clean - The initial step

"Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@...il.com> writes:

> I think it's a good thing that we have to take a little more care when
> choosing global function and variable names... Take up() for example -
> in my (very humble) oppinion that is a very bad name for a global
> function - it clashes too easily with local function and variable
> names, and a programmer who's not careful may end up calling the
> global up() when he wants the local and vice versa (a much better name
> would have been sem_up() - should we change that???).

Possibly, but it could then conflict with something else. Anytime we
add/change some global symbol, we would have to scan entire kernel
for conflicts (authors of (yet) off-tree things would hate us).
I don't think it's practical, especially with, IMHO, no real gain.

> I don't agree with you and I don't know how to convince you, but I
> still appreciate your feedback.
> Thanks.

You're welcome. I'd be more happy if I could say I like the idea :-(

> I'll leave it to people higher in the hierarchy to decide if these
> patches should be applied or not ;)

Sure.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
-
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/