linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] crypto: qat

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: <ZPAPSOnSTMgYrlV/@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:   Thu, 31 Aug 2023 11:55:52 +0800
From:   Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
Cc:     Lucas Segarra Fernandez <lucas.segarra.fernandez@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        qat-linux@...el.com, alx@...nel.org,
        Giovanni Cabiddu <giovanni.cabiddu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] crypto: qat - refactor included headers

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 05:08:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> Do I understand correctly that you want *ideally* to have THE kernel.h
> as a _single_ header and that's it?

My rule of thumb for a .c file is that if you need more than two
headers directly included by kernel.h then you should just use
kernel.h.

> While I understand your motivation as a maintainer, I hate the idea of current
> kernel.h to be included as a silver bullet to every file because people are not
> capable to understand this C language part of design. The usage of the proper
> headers show that developer _thought_ very well about what they are doing in
> the driver. Neglecting this affects the quality of the code in my opinion.
> That's why I strongly recommend to avoid kernel.h inclusion unless it's indeed
> the one that provides something that is used in the driver. Even though, the
> rest headers also need to be included (as it wasn't done by kernel.h at any
> circumstances).

I have no qualms with fixing header files that include kernel.h
to include whatever it is that they need directly.  That is a
worthy goal and should be enforced for all new header files.

I just don't share your enthusiasm about doing the same for .c
files.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt