linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 10/11] backports: prefix c-file / h-file auto backport with BPAUTO

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: <20141105080252.GK12953@wotan.suse.de>
Date:	Wed, 5 Nov 2014 09:02:52 +0100
From:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>,
	backports@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	yann.morin.1998@...e.fr, mmarek@...e.cz, sassmann@...nic.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 10/11] backports: prefix c-file / h-file auto
	backport with BPAUTO

On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 08:29:50AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 01:21 +0100, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> 
> > > > I did at one point have BACKPORT_BPAUTO_* stuff on the compat/Kconfig for
> > > > the auto stuff but figured that was superfluous. I'll respin with it.
> > > 
> > > Not sure what you mean? It seems to me you should just drop the changes
> > > like the one I quoted above.
> > 
> > If we keep BACKPORT_BPAUTO as prefix on compat/Kconfig for auto backport
> > stuff we'll end up with BACKPORT_BACKPORT_BPAUTO, while technically correct
> > as you have pointed out, I find it personally superfluous. If we however
> > only use BPAUTO_ prefix on the compat/Kconfig we'll end up with BACKPORT_BPAUTO.
> 
> Correct.
> 
> > Its subjective then, but I was opting in to prefer to just keep BPAUTO_ prefix
> > with the resulting CPTCFG_BPAUTO for packaging and CONFIG_BACKPORT_BPAUTO for
> > integration for these, if you however feel its best to double the BACKPORT
> > prefix that's fine too, it just seemed odd (although I realize correct).
> 
> No, I'm perfectly happy with CPTCFG_BPAUTO.

OK cool.

> But the *code* changes
> you're making here that check whether bp_prefix is being duplicated
> aren't necessary for that, and are in fact confusing and dangerous.

Understood, thanks for the review, hopefully this is addressed with the
latest series.

  Luis
--
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/