linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/6] staging: pi433: Rename enum optionOnOff in rf69

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:   Mon, 4 Dec 2017 22:15:22 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Marcus Wolf <marcus.wolf@...rthome-wolf.de>
Cc:     Simon Sandström <simon@...anor.nu>,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux@...f-Entwicklungen.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] staging: pi433: Rename enum optionOnOff in
 rf69_enum.h

On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 08:37:51PM +0200, Marcus Wolf wrote:
> 
> 
> Am 04.12.2017 um 12:37 schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2017 at 01:17:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > Perhaps choose different function names if you want?  You could do it
> > > as several patches:
> > > 
> > > patch 1: change types to bool
> > > patch 2: sed -e '/ == optionOn//'
> > > patch 3: split the functions into two functions
> > > patch 4: delete optionOnOff enum
> > > 
> > > patches 1 and 2 could be merged together (your choice).
> > > 
> > 
> > Markus says that optionOn is used by user space so my you won't be able
> > to remove these entirely.  But as much as possible we should internally.
> > 
> > regards,
> > dan carpenter
> > 
> 
> Hi Dan, hi Simon,
> 
> I think, it's a pretty nice idea to remove th optionOnOff and replace it by
> bool.
> 
> <history>
> In former times, the variables in the config struct had very different names
> - not containing "enable". Therefore optionOnOff was used to make absolutely
> clear (in user space), wheter something was switched on, or off.
> Now the variable have nice names, so bool is fine, even better now :-)
> </history>
> 
> I would suggest not to split the amp-functions but to rename them, to also
> contain an enable:
> rf69_set_amp_X_enable()

That's a bad name, because it doesn't just enable it also disables.
Please split them.

regards,
dan carpenter