linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH vRFC 3/8] treewide: rename firmware_request

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: <2024022323-accustom-eradicate-8af4@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 16:33:40 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>, russ.weight@...ux.dev,
	rafael@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH vRFC 3/8] treewide: rename firmware_request_platform()

On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 07:15:45AM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 07:21:31AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:30:28PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > > Rename firmware_request_platform() to request_firmware_platform()
> > > to be more concrete and align with the name of other request
> > > firmware family functions.
> > 
> > Sorry, but no, it should be "noun_verb" for public functions.
> 
> News to me, do we have this documented somewhere?

Not really, but searching makes it nicer.

And yes, I violated this in the past in places, and have regretted it...

> > Yes, we mess this up a lot, but keeping the namespace this way works out
> > better for global symbols, so "firmware_*" is best please.
> 
> We should certainly stick to *one* pattern, for the better, and it
> occurs to me we could further review this with a coccinelle python
> script for public functions, checking the first two elements of a public
> function for noun and verb.

Changing the existing function names for no real reason isn't probably a
good idea, nor worth it.  The firmware_* function prefix is good, let's
keep it please.

If you really wanted to be picky, we should make them part of a module
namespace too :)

thanks,

greg k-h