linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 3/6] x86, NMI, Rename memory parity error to PCI SERR error

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: <1284682105.32373.11.camel@yhuang-dev>
Date:	Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:08:25 +0800
From:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/6] x86, NMI, Rename memory parity error to PCI SERR
 error

On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 16:18 +0800, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 12.09.10 22:02:06, Huang Ying wrote:
> > > Haven't you introduced *_MEMPAR with patch 1/6?
> > 
> > Yes. And I suggest to rename it to *_SERR in this patch to reflect the
> > contemporary hardware better. I think they are two steps: naming the
> > magic number and changing the name of constant and function.
> 
> Hmm, I would rather avoid introducing a name and then immediatly
> renaming it again.

I split them into two patches because there is function named as
mem_parity_error already. The 1/6 names constants as *_MEMPAR to make it
consistent with mem_parity_error(). 3/6 rename both the constants,
function name and some string/comments to serr. Do you think this is
more clean?

Best Regards,
Huang Ying


--
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/