linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 03/26] cxl: Rename member @dport of struct cxl

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <80c27ea8-4d82-a41d-1ccb-17d8da974faa@amd.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Jun 2023 09:36:51 -0500
From:   Terry Bowman <Terry.Bowman@....com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        alison.schofield@...el.com, vishal.l.verma@...el.com,
        ira.weiny@...el.com, bwidawsk@...nel.org, dave.jiang@...el.com,
        Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     rrichter@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/26] cxl: Rename member @dport of struct cxl_dport to
 @dev

Hi Dan,


On 6/8/23 01:42, Dan Williams wrote:
> Terry Bowman wrote:
>> From: Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>
>>
>> Reading code like dport->dport does not immediately suggest that this
>> points to the corresponding device structure of the dport. Rename
>> struct member @dport to @dev.
> 
> This one I don't agree with.
> 
> This can switch to ->dport_dev if you like. The reason for ->dport was
> for symmetry with the ->uport of a 'struct cxl_port'. So if you change
> this to ->dport_dev then also make the ->uport_dev change for symmetry.
> 
> Unlike a 'struct cxl_port' a 'struct cxl_dport' is not a device in its
> own right which is what I see when I read dport->dev.
>

Ok, I'll change the structure member names and code to use the following:
struct cxl_dport::dev  -> struct cxl_dport::dport_dev

struct cxl_port::uport -> struct cxl_port::uport_dev


Regards,
Terry

>>
>> While at it, also rename @new argument of add_dport() to @dport. This
>> better describes the variable as a dport (e.g. new->dport becomes to
>> dport->dev).
> 
> There is already other occurrences of dport_dev as an argument, so I
> think that works here too.