linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: constify instance of "struct attribute

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: <20160708135531.GB22329@char.us.oracle.com>
Date:	Fri, 8 Jul 2016 09:55:31 -0400
From:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>
Cc:	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
	Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@...rix.com>,
	xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-blkback: constify instance of "struct
 attribute_group"

On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 09:57:10AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 07.07.16 at 17:37, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 10:52:18AM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >> On 07/07/16 10:45, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 01:38:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> >> The functions such get passed to have been taking pointers to const
> >> >> since at least 2.6.16.
> >> >>
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
> >> > Acked-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@...rix.com>
> >> >
> >> > Although the wording in the commit message looks weird to me, but I'm not a 
> > 
> >> > native speaker anyway.
> >> 
> >> As a native speaker, I can't parse it either.
> >> 
> >> I think s/such/these/ is needed.
> > 
> > The functions such as these have been taking pointers to const
> > since at least 2.6.16. 
> 
> I had taken Andrew's suggestion literally and changed it to "The
> functions these get passed to have been taking pointers to const
> since at least 2.6.16" for a possible (if needed) resubmission.

No need to resubmit. I will use Andrew's suggestion.
> 
> Jan