linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/25] Replace DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE

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: <1405702472.30262.1.camel@dabdike.int.hansenpartnership.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:54:32 -0700
From:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
	Benoit Taine <benoit.taine@...6.fr>, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	ath5k-devel@...ema.h4ckr.net, linux-acenic@...site.dk,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
	ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, linux-hippi@...site.dk,
	industrypack-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@...gotech.com,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	ath9k-devel@...ema.h4ckr.net, wil6210@....qualcomm.com,
	linux-pcmcia@...ts.infradead.org, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, users@...x00.serialmonkey.com,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
	devel@...uxdriverproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/25] Replace DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro use

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 09:43 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 12:22:13PM -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:26:47PM +0200, Benoit Taine wrote:
> > > We should prefer `const struct pci_device_id` over
> > > `DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE` to meet kernel coding style guidelines.
> > > This issue was reported by checkpatch.
> > 
> > Honestly, I prefer the macro -- it stands-out more.  Maybe the style
> > guidelines and/or checkpatch should change instead?
> 
> The macro is horrid, no other bus has this type of thing just to save a
> few characters in typing

OK, so this is the macro:

#define DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE(_table) \
	const struct pci_device_id _table[]

Could you explain what's so horrible?

The reason it's useful today is that people forget the const (and
sometimes the [] making it a true table instead of a pointer).  If you
use the DEFINE_PCI_DEVICE_TABLE macro, the compile breaks if you use it
wrongly (good) and you automatically get the correct annotations.

> , so why should PCI be "special" in this regard
> anymore?

I think the PCI usage dwarfs most other bus types now, so you could turn
the question around.  However, I don't think majority voting is a good
guide to best practise; lets debate the merits for their own sake.

James


--
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/