linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpiolib: cdev: Split line_get_debounce

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: <ZYWH_ZLOz7eKh0CE@rigel>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 20:58:37 +0800
From: Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpiolib: cdev: Split line_get_debounce_period()
 and use

On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 02:40:59PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 09:58:48AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 2:12 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 07:55:27PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > Instead of repeating the same code and reduce possible miss
> > > > of READ_ONCE(), split line_get_debounce_period() heler out
> > > > and use in the existing cases.
> > > >
> > >
> > > helper
> > >
> > >
> > > Not a fan of this change.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, sorry but NAK. READ_ONCE() is well known and tells you what the
> > code does. Arbitrary line_get_debounce_period() makes me have to look
> > it up.
>
> We have setter, but not getter. It looks confusing, more over, the setter makes
> much more than just set. Hence another way to solve this is make clear (by
> changing name) that the setter is not _just_ a setter.
>

As I mentioned elsewhere, the side effects of the setter are irrelevant
to the caller, so from their point of view it is _just_ a setter.
Calling it something else would actually be more confusing.

Cheers,
Kent.