linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI/portdrv: add support for different MSI interrupts for PCIe port services

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]

Date:   Mon, 22 May 2017 10:44:11 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Gabriele Paoloni <gabriele.paoloni@...wei.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        "helgaas@...nel.org" <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        "linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        "lukas@...ner.de" <lukas@...ner.de>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com" <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        "liudongdong (C)" <liudongdong3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] PCI/portdrv: add support for different MSI
 interrupts for PCIe port services

On Sun, May 21, 2017 at 03:00:46PM +0000, Gabriele Paoloni wrote:
> 
> I thought that in your previous review you meant to say that we should
> avoid 2 instances of the same comment (in this patchset I only have this 
> instance as I have removed the same comment from patch 2/2...)

No, there is no pointin the comment.  The whole point of pci_irq_vector
is to abstract away from how to get at the interrupt in detail.  There
is no need to comment on this at the callsite.  If you think the
existing documentation for the function is not good enough send a patch
to improve it there instead of commenting the callsites.