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:   Thu, 16 Sep 2021 12:03:20 +0200
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/16] tty: drop tty_flip_buffer_push

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:14:15AM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> Since commit a9c3f68f3cd8d (tty: Fix low_latency BUG) in 2014,
> tty_flip_buffer_push() is only a wrapper to tty_schedule_flip(). All
> users were converted, so remove tty_flip_buffer_push() completely.

Did you consider inlining tty_flip_buffer_push() or unexporting
tty_schedule_flip() instead?

The name tty_flip_buffer_push() is arguable more descriptive since the
work may already be running and is also less tied to the implementation.

The ratio of drivers using tty_flip_buffer_push() over
tty_schedule_flip() is also something like 186 to 15 so that would
amount to a lot less churn too.

Also, can you please start adding cover letters to your series to
provide an overview of what it is you're trying to accomplish?

Johan

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ