linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] drivers:edac: Use DEVICE

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]

Date:   Mon, 12 Jul 2021 15:44:33 -0400
From:   Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>
To:     Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>
Cc:     bp@...en8.de, mchehab@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
        james.morse@....com, rric@...nel.org, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com,
        kbuild-all@...ts.01.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers:edac: Use DEVICE_ATTR helper macros

On Sun, Jul 11, 2021 at 07:40:02PM +0530, Dwaipayan Ray wrote:
> Instead of "open coding" DEVICE_ATTR, use the corresponding
> helper macros DEVICE_ATTR_{RW,RO_WO} in amd64_edac.c
> 

I think you meant to write "RO,WO" rather than "RO_WO", correct?

Was this change inspired by a code-checking tool or script?

> Some function names needed to be changed to match the device
> conventions <foo>_show and <foo>_store, but the functionality
> itself is unchanged.
> 
> The devices using EDAC_DCT_ATTR_SHOW() are left unchanged.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@...il.com>
> ---
> 
> Changes in v2:
> - Revert back the device name changes which broke
>   the kernel. These were using the macro EDAC_DCT_ATTR_SHOW()
>   to construct the show methods based on device name.
>   Reported by Kernel test bot.
> 
>  drivers/edac/amd64_edac.c | 21 ++++++++-------------
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> 

The $SUBJECT should say something like "EDAC/amd64" since the change is
wholly within amd64_edac.c. Using "driver:edac" makes it seem like this
patch affects multiple EDAC modules.

But otherwise it looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@....com>

Thanks,
Yazen