linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] thermal: Constify 'type' argument for the registration routine

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120620012541.GA3564@lizard>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:25:41 -0700
From:	Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: Constify 'type' argument for the registration
 routine

On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 05:11:28PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2012 21:50:37 -0700
> Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > thermal_zone_device_register() does not modify 'type' argument, so
> > it is safe to declare it as const. Otherwise, if we pass a const
> > string, we are getting the ugly warning:
> > 
> > ...
> >
> 
> For some reason I can't apply this.

The reason is the same patch in ACPI tree that "broke" battery tree;
we're just touching the same lines of code and that causes some pain.

> I typed it in again and it seems
> to work OK.  I'll assume that someone else will merge it into
> whatever-tree-broke.

Len, will you merge this patch? Or should I take it into battery
tree? (If I'm taking it, then Stephen will have to resolve some
conflicts upon next -next tree generation.)

> > +struct thermal_zone_device *
> > +thermal_zone_device_register(const char *, int, void *,
> >  		const struct thermal_zone_device_ops *, int tc1, int tc2,
> >  		int passive_freq, int polling_freq);
> >  void thermal_zone_device_unregister(struct thermal_zone_device *);
> 
> Personally, I prefer it when the arguments are named in the declaration
> - if you ever have reason to *read* the thing, the lack of names is
> quite maddening.  Particularly when the function has 72 arguments.

:-)

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
Email: cbouatmailru@...il.com
--
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/