linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH EDACv16 1/2] edac: Change internal representation to work with layers

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: <20120430074717.GB8182@aftab.osrc.amd.com>
Date:	Mon, 30 Apr 2012 09:47:17 +0200
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
To:	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...hat.com>
Cc:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	Linux Edac Mailing List <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Aristeu Rozanski <arozansk@...hat.com>,
	Doug Thompson <norsk5@...oo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH EDACv16 1/2] edac: Change internal representation to work
 with layers

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 02:39:04PM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em 29-04-2012 13:43, Joe Perches escreveu:
> > On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 13:20 -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> >> The script below is even better. After that, only 113 occurrences of __func__
> >> is now found at drivers/edac, and some of them are not related to debugf[1-9],
> >> so they shouldn't be cover on a patch like that.
> >> I'll do some manual cleanup on it.
> > 
> > Hi Mauro.
> > 
> > Another thing you could do would be to
> > separate the level from the multiple macros,
> > use a single macro, and convert the uses.
> > 
> > #define debugf(level, fmt, ...)
> > and change the uses to
> > debugf([0-n], "some format", args...)
> > 
> > I believe that's the more predominate
> > kernel style for debugging macros with
> > a tested level or mask.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> > Perhaps also add !CONFIG_EDAC_DEBUG
> > format/args checking to the debug statements.
> 
> Most/all debug-only stuff are already checking for CONFIG_EDAC_DEBUG.
> There are a few static debug-only data/functions that aren't testing for
> it, but the compiler should remove the dead code anyway, so this shouldn't
> cause any harm.
> 
> > Lastly, indenting the messages 2 tabs isn't
> > really useful, one or two spaces is probably
> > enough.
> 
> agreed.
> 
> > 
> > I did this a bit ago so it may not apply
> > after your changes:
> 
> Believe or not, it applied without troubles ;)
> 
> I've added at the end of my experimental series, at:
> 
> 
> git://git.infradead.org/users/mchehab/edac.git experimental
> 
> be careful if you use this branch, as I'm rebasing it every time I need
> to change something on this series.
> 
> I'm keeping a non-rebased version, with one branch per review, at:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mchehab/linux-edac.git
> 
> The current review is at hw_events_v17. Patches were already pushed there.
> they should be there after the usual kernel.org master/mirror replication
> delay.

Now wait a minute,

you guys are so trigger-happy to apply humongous, cleanup patches but
let me ask this: can anyone of you really test those changes with each
driver? Do you have all the hardware that those patches touch?

I know, I know, it builds fine and it looks correct but subtle bugs tend
to sneak in in exactly such situations.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
--
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/