linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] acpi: apei: Rename ghes_severity() to ghes_cper

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]

Message-ID: <53d0ba88-6929-a7cf-6c3e-4ca389f7249a@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 May 2018 08:38:39 -0500
From:   "Alex G." <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, alex_gagniuc@...lteam.com,
        austin_bolen@...l.com, shyam_iyer@...l.com,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@...wei.com>,
        "Jonathan (Zhixiong) Zhang" <zjzhang@...eaurora.org>,
        Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@...wei.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] acpi: apei: Rename ghes_severity() to
 ghes_cper_severity()



On 05/22/2018 03:55 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 3:49 PM, Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com> wrote:
>> ghes_severity() is a misnomer in this case, as it implies the severity
>> of the entire GHES structure. Instead, it maps one CPER value to a
>> GHES_SEV* value. ghes_cper_severity() is clearer.
> 
> It looks like the *real* reason for this change is that you
> re-introduce ghes_severity() as a different function in the second
> patch.

/me holds fist at Borislav

> There are a couple of reasons to avoid that, one of them being that
> people will now have to remember what the function did in which kernel
> versions. 

So?

> Also, the current name is good enough IMO,

Two other reviewers were extremely confused by the vague name, so no,
this is not good enough.

> so I'm not going to apply this patch.