linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pwm: core: Replace custom implementation of device_match

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: <YzRq4fGcWACBi8WP@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Sep 2022 18:40:17 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pwm: core: Replace custom implementation of
 device_match_fwnode()

On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 04:57:57PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 05:49:36PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 04:26:47PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 08:22:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > Replace custom implementation of the device_match_fwnode().
> > 
> > > I really don't see the point in having an exported symbol for this. It's
> > > a simple comparison and the result is even longer than the original.
> > 
> > Longer doesn't always mean worse.
> > 
> > > The
> > > *only* reason why this helper exists seems to be because it is getting
> > > used in *_find_device() callbacks.
> > 
> > Yes and no. Initially for the purpose to be a callback it can be reused.
> > The point is that it hides the dev_fwnode() machinery behind and taking
> > into account ongoing discussion about constification of the dev_fwnode()
> > we might need to touch this or similar places to avoid problems with
> > compiler.
> 
> Maybe next time use that argument in the commit message. That's much
> more convincing than a useless "replace custom implementation" because
> that just makes it look like you're doing this to pass the time or
> something.

Noted.

> Applied, with a slightly updated commit message, thanks.

Thank you!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko