linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv4 6/8] videobuf2: add queue memory coherency parameter

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: <YRuSzbVWPd/JpPjj@google.com>
Date:   Tue, 17 Aug 2021 19:43:25 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To:     Hans Verkuil <hverkuil-cisco@...all.nl>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Tomasz Figa <tfiga@...omium.org>,
        Dafna Hirschfeld <dafna.hirschfeld@...labora.com>,
        Ricardo Ribalda <ribalda@...omium.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 6/8] videobuf2: add queue memory coherency parameter

On (21/08/03 10:29), Hans Verkuil wrote:
> >  
> > +static void set_queue_coherency(struct vb2_queue *q, bool coherent_mem)
> > +{
> > +	q->coherent_mem = 1;
> 
> This I do not like: coherent memory is the default, and so I think it will
> be more robust if this field is renamed to non_coherent_mem and so coherent
> memory will be the default since this field will be cleared initially with
> kzalloc.
> 
> Basically a similar argument that you used in patch 2/8.
> 
> I also think that it improves readability, since non-coherent is the
> exceptional case, not the rule, and the field name corresponds with the
> V4L2 memory flag name.
> 
> I noticed that in v1 of this series it was actually called non_coherent_mem,
> and it was changed in v2, actually after some comments from me.
> 
> But I changed my mind on that, and I think it makes more sense to go back to
> calling this non_coherent_mem.

Ok, done. Hans, is this your final decision? :)