linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -V2 1/2] mempolicy: Rename MPOL_F_MORON to MPOL_F

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]

Date:   Mon, 02 Nov 2020 11:12:59 +0800
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Matthew Wilcox \(Oracle\)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        Rafael Aquini <aquini@...hat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -V2 1/2] mempolicy: Rename MPOL_F_MORON to MPOL_F_MOPRON

Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> writes:

> On Fri 30-10-20 15:27:51, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> writes:
>> 
>> > On Wed 28-10-20 10:34:10, Huang Ying wrote:
>> >> To follow code-of-conduct better.
>> >
>> > This is changing a user visible interface and any userspace which refers
>> > to the existing name will fail to compile unless I am missing something.
>> 
>> Although these flags are put in uapi, I found these flags are actually
>> internal flags used in "flags" field of struct mempolicy, they are never
>> used as flags for any user space API.  I guess they are placed in uapi
>> header file to guarantee they aren't conflict with MPOL_MODE_FLAGS.
>
> You are right. I have missed that. The comment in the header even explains
> that. Anyway the placement is rather unusual and I think that those
> flags do not belong there.
>  
>> > Have you checked how many applications would be affected?
>> 
>> Based on above analysis, I think there is no application that will be
>> affected.
>> 
>> > Btw I find "follow CoC better" a very weak argument without further
>> > explanation.
>> 
>> That is the only reason for the patch.  If nobody thinks the change is
>> necessary, I can just drop the patch.
>
> Well, to be honest I do not see any problem with the naming.

This is a capitalized words and prefixed, so most people think it's OK.
And in PATCH 2/2, there's a newly added label,

mopron:

Which may become

moron:

some people think that we'd better to change it.  And to make the wording
consistent, the constant is changed too.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying