linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Re: Battery class driver.

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: <20061028211008.GB30819@elf.ucw.cz>
Date:	Sat, 28 Oct 2006 23:10:08 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	David Zeuthen <davidz@...hat.com>
Cc:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Shem Multinymous <multinymous@...il.com>,
	Richard Hughes <hughsient@...il.com>,
	Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	devel@...top.org, sfr@...b.auug.org.au, len.brown@...el.com,
	greg@...ah.com, benh@...nel.crashing.org,
	linux-thinkpad mailing list <linux-thinkpad@...ux-thinkpad.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Re: Battery class driver.

On Sat 2006-10-28 15:48:54, David Zeuthen wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-10-28 at 18:52 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > This is ugly, and unneccessary: kernel is centrally controlled. We
> > *will* want to merge such attributes into something standard.
> 
> Uh, such standards don't happen overnight as this thread painfully
> demonstrates, i.e. there is not yet any "standard" for handling
> batteries until dwmw2 actually stepped up. That alone says something.
> And we're at 2.6.19 about 15 years into development of Linux?

And we have sys_open. Not sys_x_ext2_open.

> You may or may not like it... but battery class drivers will have such
> non-standard things. I'm merely suggesting to tag these as non-standard
> so it's bloody evident they are non-standard. For the record, I also
> think that making non standard attributes ugly will help accelerate us
> in standardizing on it. You can also easier grep through the sources to
> find offending code when you do decide to standardize it.

You can simply _not merge offending code in the first place_.

"Lets design it so that stupid things can be grepped for" is stupid,
when we can simply "not allow stupid things to be merged".
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
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/