linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mtd: spi-nor: Move Software Write Protection logic out of the core

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 17 Mar 2021 21:44:25 +0530
From:   Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
To:     Pratyush Yadav <p.yadav@...com>, <Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com>
CC:     <michael@...le.cc>, <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, <richard@....at>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mtd: spi-nor: Move Software Write Protection logic
 out of the core



On 3/17/21 2:35 PM, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> On 17/03/21 06:09AM, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 3/15/21 8:23 AM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> On 3/9/21 12:58 PM, Tudor.Ambarus@...rochip.com wrote:
>>>> On 3/8/21 7:28 PM, Vignesh Raghavendra wrote:
>>>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/6/21 3:20 PM, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>>>>> It makes the core file a bit smaller and provides better separation
>>>>>> between the Software Write Protection features and the core logic.
>>>>>> All the next generic software write protection features (e.g. Individual
>>>>>> Block Protection) will reside in swp.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...rochip.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/Makefile |   2 +-
>>>>>>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.c   | 407 +---------------------------------
>>>>>>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/core.h   |   4 +
>>>>>>  drivers/mtd/spi-nor/swp.c    | 419 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm, name swp.c does not seem intuitive to me. How about expanding it a
>>>>> bit:
>>>>>
>>>>> soft-wr-protect.c or software-write-protect.c ?
>>
>> Having in mind that we have the SWP configs, I think I prefer swp.c.
>> But let's see what majority thinks, we'll do as majority prefers.
>> Michael, Pratyush?
> 
> I don't have much of an opinion on this tbh. But I usually prefer short 
> names so I'd go with swp.c here. Maybe also add a comment at the top of 
> the file mentioning the full name "Software Write Protection logic" or 
> something similar for clarification.
> 

I don't have hard objection to swp.c. As Pratyush suggested, a comment
at top of the file indicating the purpose would be good to have.