linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpufreq: unify the show() and store() styles of attr

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20220308145826.2s4gc2m3feqvgajl@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Tue, 8 Mar 2022 20:28:26 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Lianjie Zhang <zhanglianjie@...ontech.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpufreq: unify the show() and store() styles of
 attr

On 08-03-22, 22:09, Lianjie Zhang wrote:
> From: zhanglianjie <zhanglianjie@...ontech.com>
> 
> Usually /sys directory under the file, the corresponding Attribute
> contains .show and .store, and their naming style is filename_show() and
> filename_store(). But all naming style in 'cpufreq' is show_filename()
> and store_filename(), resulting in __ATTR_RW() and __ATTR_RO() macros
> cannot be used to simplify code, So need to change naming style.

I haven't received the other patch.

Since you are going to resend anyway, I think you can merge both the patches and
instead of the "Unify" part, just mention that you want to reuse the __ATTR_XX()
macros, and so renaming is being done.

-- 
viresh