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]
Message-ID: <ZNEGrl2lzbbuelV7@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2023 17:58:54 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
Cc:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] lib/vsprintf: Sort headers alphabetically

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 04:31:37PM +0200, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Sat 2023-08-05 20:50:25, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Sorting headers alphabetically helps locating duplicates, and
> > make it easier to figure out where to insert new headers.
> 
> I agree that includes become a mess after some time. But I am
> not persuaded that sorting them alphabetically in random source
> files help anything.
> 
> Is this part of some grand plan for the entire kernel, please?
> Is this outcome from some particular discussion?
> Will this become a well know rule checked by checkpatch.pl?
> 
> I am personally not going to reject patches because of wrongly
> sorted headers unless there is some real plan behind it.
> 
> I agree that it might look better. An inverse Christmas' tree
> also looks better. But it does not mean that it makes the life
> easier.

It does from my point of view as maintainability is increased.

> The important things are still hidden in the details
> (every single line).
> 
> From my POV, this patch would just create a mess in the git
> history and complicate backporting.
> 
> I am sorry but I will not accept this patch unless there
> is a wide consensus that this makes sense.

Your choice, of course, But I see in practice dup headers being
added, or some unrelated ones left untouched because header list
mess, and in those cases sorting can help (a bit) in my opinion.

TL;DR: I was tolerating unsorted mess (for really long header
inclusion block) up to the point when I realized how it helps
people to maintain the code.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ