linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/36] pinctrl: don't use GPIOLIB global numberspace in helpers

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: <CAHp75VfWi91WaJuoW0NWrHH9=KRjOcrwwCeiXhnBd6Wg+o2Qow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Oct 2023 12:35:27 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/36] pinctrl: don't use GPIOLIB global numberspace in helpers

On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 11:42 AM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 4, 2023 at 10:12 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
> > What is your view on Andy's and Kent's issues with the _new() name
> > suffix?
>
> We have done similar operations in the past, and it is similar to what
> Uwe is doing for the moment with the .remove() callbacks.
>
> Usually the strategy is employed when the work needs to be spread
> out over a few merge windows so it is a bit of a marker that "this is
> in transition".
>
> There is the  horror story of this staying around forever and becoming
> idiomatic: struct napi_struct (include/linux/netdevice.h) where
> "napi" means "new API" - yeah that could have been handled better...
>
> If there is more moaning about it I will simply squash all the patches
> into one and call it a day - the end result will be the same and no
> sign of any *_new suffix anywhere. It was still worth it for reviewing
> the driver changes on a per-driver basis so then it becomes one of
> those Schopenhauer ladders that you can toss away after climbing
> it.

You can go with a compromise and name it better from the start, so at
least the patches that are taking care of renaming back won't be
needed.
Another way to have three or so patches with combined efforts, but still...


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko