linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] platform/x86: wmi: add WMI support to MODULE_DEVICE

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 27 Jan 2019 20:15:54 +0100
From:   Mattias Jacobsson <2pi@....nu>
To:     Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
CC:     <andy@...radead.org>, <mario.limonciello@...l.com>,
        <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>, <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
        <pali.rohar@...il.com>, <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <2pi@....nu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] platform/x86: wmi: add WMI support to
 MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE()

Hi Darren,

On 2019-01-26, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 12:55:52PM +0100, Mattias Jacobsson wrote:
> > This patchset adds WMI support to MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE().
> 
> Hi Mattias,
> 
> Thanks for the patch series. I've reviewed and found no major issues - but what
> I'm missing from this cover letter and each commit message is the why. What is
> the problem this series is intended to address? This should be clear in the
> commit messages so developers reading the git history have the necessary context
> to understand why the change was made and the intent behind them were.

Thanks for reviewing the patchset!

> 
> The only advantage that I see by the end of the series is removing the need for
> driver authors to prefix the modules alias  with "wmi:" - which is an advantage
> and avoids careless errors. Is that the only goal? It adds some complexity by
> spreading the implementation across more files and more directories, so we need
> to document the justification.

Now that you point it out I can definitely see that the reasoning isn't
explicitly stated. Sorry about that!

I've updated the commit messages for [PATCH 2/3] and [PATCH 3/3] in v2
of this patchset to clarify the "why".

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -- 
> Darren Hart
> VMware Open Source Technology Center

Thanks,
Mattias