linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Tidy up of modules using seq

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: <20140829121426.4044f2a330f9d74fe37f7825@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:14:26 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Rob Jones <rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	jbaron@...mai.com, cl@...ux-foundation.org, penberg@...nel.org,
	mpm@...enic.com, linux-kernel@...ethink.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Tidy up of modules using seq_open()

On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 17:06:36 +0100 Rob Jones <rob.jones@...ethink.co.uk> wrote:

> Many modules use seq_open() when seq_open_private() or
> __seq_open_private() would be more appropriate and result in
> simpler, cleaner code.
> 
> This patch sequence changes those instances in IPC, MM and LIB.

Looks good to me.

I can't begin to imagine why we added the global, exported-to-modules
seq_open_private() without bothering to document it, so any time you
feel like adding the missing kerneldoc...

And psize should have been size_t, ho hum.

--
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/