linux-kernel - Re: code style: Re: [PATCH v4] printk: Userspace format enumeration support

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: <YC5IV9yAAg2t8PoX@alley>
Date:   Thu, 18 Feb 2021 11:58:31 +0100
From:   Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
To:     Chris Down <chris@...isdown.name>
Cc:     Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
        John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: code style: Re: [PATCH v4] printk: Userspace format enumeration
 support

On Wed 2021-02-17 15:56:38, Chris Down wrote:
> Petr Mladek writes:
> > > > How about config PRINTK_INDEX?
> > > 
> > > Ah yes, I also like that. PRINTK_INDEX is fine from my perspective and is
> > > more straightforward than "enumeration", thanks.
> > 
> > It is better than enumeration. But there is still the same
> > problem. The word "index" is used neither in the code
> > nor in the debugfs interface. It is like enabling cars and
> > seeing apples.
> > 
> > What about CONFIG_PRINTK_DEBUGFS?
> > 
> > It seems that various subsystems use CONFIG_<SUBSYSTEM>_DEBUGFS
> > pattern when they expose some internals in debugfs.
> 
> The thing I don't like about that is that it describes a largely
> inconsequential implementation detail rather than the semantic intent of the
> config change, which is what the person deciding what to include in their
> config is likely to care about.  Often when I see "XXX debug interface" when
> doing `make oldconfig` I think to myself "yes, but what does the debugfs
> interface _do_?".

I see.

> If someone else was writing this patch, and I saw "CONFIG_PRINTK_DEBUGFS"
> appear in my prod kernel, I'd probably say N, because I don't need printk
> debugging information. On the other hand, if I saw "CONFIG_PRINTK_INDEX", I'd
> immediately understand that it's probably applicable to me.
> 
> I'm happy to rename the debugfs structure as <debugfs>/printk/fmt_index if it
> helps, but personally I really feel CONFIG_PRINTK_{INDEX,ENUMERATION,CATALOGUE}
> is a lot more descriptive than just saying "it has a debugfs interface" in the
> config name for that reason.

PRINTK_INDEX sounds the best to me. Keep in mind that I am not a
native speaker.

And my concern will be gone when we use it also in the API and debugfs
hierarchy as suggested by Johannes.

Another compromise might be to have CONFIG_PRINTK_FORMATS_INDEX.
Then the prefix printk_format_, pf_ would still match the option.
Or we could use printk_format_index_m, pfi_ indexes.

Best Regards,
Petr

PS: I feel that I have enough bike-shading. I think that I will be
    fine with anything that you choose ;-)