linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 4/5] i2c: aspeed: added driver for Aspeed I2C

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:   Tue, 25 Apr 2017 12:21:04 +1000
From:   Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>, wsa@...-dreams.de,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        jason@...edaemon.net, marc.zyngier@....com, joel@....id.au,
        vz@...ia.com, mouse@...c.ru, clg@...d.org
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/5] i2c: aspeed: added driver for Aspeed I2C

On Mon, 2017-04-24 at 11:18 -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote:
> +static int __aspeed_i2c_init_clk(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus,
> +                                struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{

Minor nit ... I'm really not fan of those underscores.

We use __ functions in some cases in the kernel for low level
helpers, usually when it's a low level variant of an existing
function or an "unlocked" variant, but I don't think generalizing
it to pretty much everything in the driver is worthwhile here.

If you want to be explicit about locking, I would suggest you
use a comment in front of the function explaining if it
expects to be called with the lock held.

We tend to only do that when *both* functions exist and one is
implemented in term of the other.

Cheers,
Ben.