linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] add pci_{request,free}

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]

Message-ID: <20061006100421.GA5335@martell.zuzino.mipt.ru>
Date:	Fri, 6 Oct 2006 14:04:21 +0400
From:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:	Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@...e.fr>
Cc:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arjan@...radead.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, akpm@...l.org, rdunlap@...otime.net,
	gregkh@...e.de
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] add pci_{request,free}_irq take #3

On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 02:36:07PM +0000, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> > > - is_irq_valid() called by pci_request_irq()
> >
> > s/is_irq_valid/valid_irq/g methinks.
> The point of the is_ prefix is to make it clear that we're returning 1
> if it's true and 0 if it's false.
> <checks thread on return values>
> err... you said[1]:
> > There are at least 3 idioms:
> > [...]
> > 2) return 1 on YES, 0 on NO.
> > [...]
> > #2 should only be used if condition in question is spelled nice:
> Which I thought made sense, and that's why the is_ prefix is there now.
> Am I missing something?

I think, looking at

	if (irq_valid(irq))

one can be damn sure it follows common convention.

That "is_" prefix just beats my ears. If is irq valid.

-
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/