linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func_

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: <c024f9d09a68417f8326ec318aec87ce@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Sep 2022 09:52:01 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Al Viro' <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Jiangshan Yi <13667453960@....com>
CC:     "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiangshan Yi <yijiangshan@...inos.cn>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] fs/efs/inode.c: use __func__ instead of function name

From: Al Viro
> Sent: 20 September 2022 01:24
> 
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 10:33:14AM +0800, Jiangshan Yi wrote:
> > From: Jiangshan Yi <yijiangshan@...inos.cn>
> >
> > It is better to use __func__ instead of function name.
> 
> 	Why is it better?  And why is it *not* sent to (active)
> maintainers of fs/erofs?  I'm not going to apply that behind their
> backs and I would ask akpm to abstain from taking that one.

It is distinctly worse.
Anyone grepping the kernel source for the message text will
fail to find it.

	David

-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)