linux-kernel - Re: MODULE

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]

Date:	Mon, 23 Apr 2007 14:32:36 +0200
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>
To:	"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
CC:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...sta.de>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: MODULE_MAINTAINER

On 04/23/2007 01:52 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Rusty Russell wrote:

>> Valid points have been made on both sides.  I suggest:
>>
>> #define MODULE_MAINTAINER(_maintainer) \
>> 	MODULE_AUTHOR("(Maintained by) "_maintainer)
> 
> why bring MODULE_AUTHOR into it?  just define it in terms of
> MODULE_INFO:
> 
> #define MODULE_MAINTAINER(_m) MODULE_INFO(_m, "(Maintained by)"  \
> 	maintainer)
> 
> technically, the maintainer is not the same as the author so why
> confuse the issue with an extra unnecessary macro expansion?

Swap arguments to MODULE_INFO, but yes, other than the extra "(Maintained 
by)" that's what was originally submitted:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/4/170

If you're going to be using a "maintainer" tag anyway as both that and yours 
above does, the "(Maintained by)" becomes superfluous, so we're back at the 
original.

I must say I'm not particularly sure either why reusing MODULE_AUTHOR would 
be better if MODULE_AUTHOR also remains (as Alan Cox pointed out might be 
desirable for legal reasons if nothing else). As fas as I'm aware, the other 
trivial patch I posted to init-module-tools:

http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/4/171

is all that's needed to make it useful.

But, I also really only care about being able to add MODULE_MAINTAINER() to 
some drivers that have outlived their authors and from that viewpoint there 
is no difference, so if Rusty feels this is better, so be it.

Andrew, mind if I submit this to you?

===
Provide MODULE_MAINTAINER() as a convenient place to stick a name and email 
address both for drivers having multiple (current and non-current) authors 
and for when someone who wants to maintain a driver isn't so much an author.

Signed-off-by: Rene Herman <rene.herman@...il.com>
===

Rene.

View attachment "module_maintainer2.diff" of type "text/plain" (604 bytes)