linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] driver core: remove devm_device_remove

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: <Y20xh1OpLGegZBRc@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2022 09:14:47 -0800
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] driver core: remove devm_device_remove_groups()

On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 02:07:51PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 10:34 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 01:10:59PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 03:11:47PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 3:07 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> > > > <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no in-kernel user of this function, so it is not needed anymore
> > > > > and can be removed.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
> > > > > Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > >
> > > > For both patches in the series:
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org>
> > >
> > > I find it really weird to have an asymmetric core API...
> >
> > I'm working on fixing up that asymmetric-ness.  We have only one user of
> > devm_device_add_groups() and only a handful of devm_device_add_group()
> > left in the tree.
> >
> > But it turns out that no one ever called these functions anyway, so they
> > aren't needed even if we did keep the "add" functions.  So they should
> > be dropped no matter what.
> 
> Totally agreed.

OK, fair enough.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry