[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180903071207.GA10249@zn.tnic>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2018 09:12:07 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: "Prakhya, Sai Praneeth" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-efi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Neri, Ricardo" <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
"matt@...eblueprint.co.uk" <matt@...eblueprint.co.uk>,
Lee Chun-Yi <jlee@...e.com>, Al Stone <astone@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/6] x86/efi: Remove __init attribute from memory
mapping functions
On Mon, Sep 03, 2018 at 05:03:56AM +0000, Prakhya, Sai Praneeth wrote:
> Hmm.. thought that __efi_init might be confusing with the normal __init attribute
How would that be confusing? It has "__efi" prepended?!
All I'm saying is, if you're going to define your own function
attributes, do them generic and short. "_fixup" is too specific IMO. It
also enlarges function definitions unnecessarily.
With "__efi_init" you already denote that it is a special attribute
which has relevance in the EFI code only. What you do about it - the
*fixup* - is the thing you do with the attribute. But you don't have to
have the "what you do" in the attribute name too.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists