linux-kernel - Re: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef

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]

Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2016 19:14:45 +0000
From:	"Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:	James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
	"<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"<devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"<lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>" <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [RFC PATCH 0/3] staging: lustre: detypedef


On Apr 1, 2016, at 2:44 PM, Joe Perches wrote:

> On Fri, 2016-04-01 at 14:23 +0000, Drokin, Oleg wrote:
>> On Apr 1, 2016, at 9:02 AM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> 
>>> Question about removing lustre typedefs.
>>> 
>>> Various bits of lustre code use a mix of struct foo and foo_t.
>>> 
>>> When would be an appropriate time to submit patches similar to
>>> below that individually remove various typedefs from lustre code?
>> I think now is as good time as any.
>> the only small correction is those are LNet typedefs.
>> While LNet is technically part of Lustre, it's a bit of a separate
>> thing useful without Lustre too.
>> 
>> I know James is working on cleaning up LNet, but I don't know if he has
>> anything this would be conflicting at this moment or not.
>> 
>> Thanks for the patches. I wonder if you are generating them automatically?
>> Because it would be great if it also fixes the alignment issues
> 
> It's pretty automatic.
> 
> It's a trivial variant of the detypedef perl script I wrote awhile ago:
> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.drivers.driver-project.devel/18603
> 
> 
> I think changing the alignment issues is better done in a
> separate patch.

but then it's two patches per change in a way. fixing one thing breaking
the other warning-wise, that's why I typically try to make such cleanup
patches not to introduce any new warnings.
> 
> James isn't cc'd on these patches as he's not a listed
> maintainer.  Maybe he should be added for all of it or
> some part of it?
> 

for drivers/staging/lustre/lnet

for the drivers/staging/lustre/lustre - the only remaining
few typedefs I am going to address, it's just some of the code using
them will go away or change the users significantly - that's why
they were left out in the first round of lustre detypedefisation.

Thanks.