linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 17/21] ata: ahci: Add DWC AHCI SATA controller support

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:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:03:27 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
Cc:     Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@...kalelectronics.ru>,
        Pavel Parkhomenko <Pavel.Parkhomenko@...kalelectronics.ru>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 17/21] ata: ahci: Add DWC AHCI SATA controller support

On 4/11/22 21:41, Serge Semin wrote:
> I beg your pardon what convention? Is it defined in someplace of the
> subsystem docs? If it's not then how should I know about that? These
> are the device-specific macro. The static methods below are also
> platform-specific and the standard kernel coding style doesn't specify
> any rule about that. Moreover the most of the AHCI glue drivers (LLDD
> like ahci_mtk.c, ahci_ceva.c, ahci_brcm.c, ahci_st.c, ahci_tegra.c,
> ahci_xgene.c, etc) use the same prefixing style as I do here. Finally
> the prefix reflects the actual device name "DWC AHCI". So if there is
> no subsystem-specific restrictions I normally define the prefix in
> that order for the sake of the clarity.

Look at how other ahci drivers have named things. That's the "convention"
I am talking about. Most of them name things ahci_xxx_... Same for macros.

> 
> Note I don't mind to convert the code to being the way you ask, but if
> it's really the AHCI-specific codying style convention then it would be
> very useful to have it described/advertised in some place in the
> kernel so to know about that beforehead for the developers reference.
> So do you insist on switching the words order in the names prefix here?

It is nice to have code consistency in the naming. That always facilitate
grepping the code.


-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research