linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kobject: Add support for default attribute groups to kobj

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: <20190324051553.GA18887@kroah.com>
Date:   Sun, 24 Mar 2019 06:15:53 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Kimberly Brown <kimbrownkd@...il.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kobject: Add support for default attribute groups to
 kobj_type

On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 11:48:21PM -0400, Kimberly Brown wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2019 at 07:07:37AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 04:14:40PM -0400, Kimberly Brown wrote:
> > > kobj_type currently uses a list of individual attributes to store
> > > default attributes. Attribute groups are more flexible than a list of
> > > attributes because groups provide support for attribute visibility. So,
> > > add support for default attribute groups to kobj_type.
> > > 
> > > In future patches, the existing uses of kobj_type’s attribute list will
> > > be converted to attribute groups. When that is complete, kobj_type’s
> > > attribute list, “default_attrs”, will be removed.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Kimberly Brown <kimbrownkd@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > >  include/linux/kobject.h |  3 ++-
> > >  lib/kobject.c           | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > Yes!  Thanks for doing this.
> > 
> > But how did you test it?  Did you convert any kobj_type structures to
> > the attribute group and see that all was the same?  Ideally I'd like to
> > take this patch with at least one subsystem that uses the change,
> > otherwise this looks like unused code in the kernel.
> 
> Yes, I tested it by converting a couple of kobj_type structures,
> including one that I recently added an is_visible() function to
> (vmbus_chan_ktype in the hv_vmbus driver).
> 
> I'll put together a patchset with this patch and at least one
> subsystem's changes.

Wonderful, I'll wait to take this when you send that series.

thanks,

greg k-h