linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] i2c: designware-pci: Use temporary variable for struct 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:   Wed, 15 Dec 2021 15:48:49 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] i2c: designware-pci: Use temporary variable for
 struct device

On Wed, Dec 15, 2021 at 09:51:10AM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
> On 12/13/21 20:00, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Use temporary variable for struct device to make code neater.

...

> > +	dev->suspended = true;
> > +	dev->disable(dev);
> In my opinion this brings more mess than removes. If I see dev->something
> I'll immediatelly think "struct device" and get confused. x_dev->something
> or dev_y->something not so much. And this change adds in my opinion more
> confusion than removes.

Either way it will be inconsistent. If you wish to fix, I can build something
on top of your fix, but currently I drop this patch.

> >   	if (id->driver_data >= ARRAY_SIZE(dw_pci_controllers)) {
> > -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s: invalid driver data %ld\n", __func__,
> > -			id->driver_data);
> > +		dev_err(d, "%s: invalid driver data %ld\n", __func__, id->driver_data);
> >   		return -EINVAL;
> 
> Honestly, what's is the value of this change?

What is the value of the changes in general? :-)

> Yet another differently named
> "device" pointer more to the mess (Inconsistent naming use of struct
> dw_i2c_dev *dev, struct dw_i2c_dev *i_dev and struct device *dev in the
> i2c-designware-*).

As I said, please fix this inconsistency yourself how you find it better
and I will use that in the future contributions.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko