linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/1] misc: add sloppy logic analyzer using polling

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 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:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 15:40:08 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Ulrich Hecht <ulrich.hecht+renesas@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/1] misc: add sloppy logic analyzer using polling

On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:32:23AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Andy,
> 
> > Nope. Below is the compile-tested one:
> 
> Well, then let's add this incrementally once it has actually been
> tested.

I have no strong opinion here, I just considered that ACPI code is good to have
as well.

> > > I don't understand the first sentence. And we still need it to clean up?
> > 
> > If you know the name of the folder, you may look up it, no need to keep a
> > variable for that.
> 
> I need the dentry twice, subdirs are also created in there. Of course, I
> could look it up twice, but why the computation? The variable seems
> simpler to me, despite it being static. Or is it a debugfs rule to not
> save dentries?

I think the best person to ask is Greg :-)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko