linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v12 02/20] cxl/core/regs: Rename @dev to @host in struct cxl_register

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]

Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2023 13:04:30 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     Robert Richter <rrichter@....com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Ben Widawsky <bwidawsk@...nel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@....com>
CC:     <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v12 02/20] cxl/core/regs: Rename @dev to @host in struct
 cxl_register_map

Robert Richter wrote:
> The primary role of @dev is to host the mappings for devm operations.
> @dev is too ambiguous as a name. I.e. when does @dev refer to the
> 'struct device *' instance that the registers belong, and when does
> @dev refer to the 'struct device *' instance hosting the mapping for
> devm operations?
> 
> Clarify the role of @dev in cxl_register_map by renaming it to @host.
> Also, rename local variables to 'host' where map->host is used.
> 
> Add Fixes: tag as the fix in the next patch depends on this change.

I tend to not add Fixes tags where they are not needed. When the next
patch fails to backport automatically we will get involved to send the
full backport set. In fact I prefer that as a checkpoint to review the
backport.

Otherwise, looks good to me.