linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] i2c: npcm7xx: Add Nuvoton NPCM I2C controller driver

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: <20200520114925.GQ1634618@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 May 2020 14:49:25 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Avi Fishman <avifishman70@...il.com>
Cc:     Tali Perry <tali.perry1@...il.com>, ofery@...gle.com,
        Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
        Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@...il.com>, kfting@...oton.com,
        Patrick Venture <venture@...gle.com>,
        Nancy Yuen <yuenn@...gle.com>,
        Benjamin Fair <benjaminfair@...gle.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, wsa@...-dreams.de,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/3] i2c: npcm7xx: Add Nuvoton NPCM I2C controller
 driver

On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 02:37:13PM +0300, Avi Fishman wrote:
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 1:24 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 12:51:12PM +0300, Tali Perry wrote:
> > > Add Nuvoton NPCM BMC I2C controller driver.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> >
> > Why?!
> 
> It is made to save code size if CONFIG_DEBUG_FS is not defined?

Nope (in cases I have commented on). Try again.

> We see a lot of kernel code that is doing it.

Cargo cult, okay. So, somebody should try to understand what they are doing.

> So could you elaborate what is the problem?

Problem 1: ugly code.
Problem 2: some of the code is not guarded (seems never been tested with disabled debugfs).
Problem 3: it's not needed.

> > > +#include <linux/debugfs.h>
> > > +#endif

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko