linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] include: linux: i2c: more helpers for declaring i2c drivers

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

Message-ID: <20190816195640.GD6886@kunai>
Date:   Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:56:40 +0200
From:   Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
Cc:     "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <info@...ux.net>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        bgolaszewski@...libre.com, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] include: linux: i2c: more helpers for declaring i2c
 drivers


(Found this mail in the offline draft folder of another laptop)

> So, then the current approach of using subsys_initcall() can't be
> changed easily, right now. But planned for the future (or at least
> not introducing new caes).

Yes.

> But: how does that conflict w/ just moving the existing redundant
> pieces into a helper macro ? The logic stays the same - just using
> a shorter notation. (assuming my patch isn't buggy ;-)).

It is not conflicting. My thinking is that such helpers, in general,
scale better and are less error prone. But there is nothing to scale
here.


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)