linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpio: Add driver for PC Engines APU2/APU3 GPIOs

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:   Fri, 03 Aug 2018 09:08:27 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, fe@....tdt.de,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: Add driver for PC Engines APU2/APU3 GPIOs

On Thu, 2018-08-02 at 23:30 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 1:12 PM Florian Eckert <fe@....tdt.de> wrote:
[]
> > +       spinlock_t lock;
> 
> I think checkpatch now mandates that you put in a comment
> about what this lock is locking.

Please remember that checkpatch doesn't mandate anything.

Documentation/process/4.Coding.rst does have:

   Certain things should always be commented.  Uses of memory barriers should
   be accompanied by a line explaining why the barrier is necessary.  The
   locking rules for data structures generally need to be explained somewhere.

So there should be some comment somewhere in the code
for the spinlock.