linux-kernel - Re: dlm: use KMEM_CACHE() in dlm_memory

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20240621103959.131413-1-lihongfu@kylinos.cn>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 18:39:59 +0800
From: Hongfu Li <lihongfu@...inos.cn>
To: markus.elfring@....de
Cc: aahringo@...hat.com,
	gfs2@...ts.linux.dev,
	julia.lawall@...ia.fr,
	lihongfu@...inos.cn,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	teigland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: dlm: use KMEM_CACHE() in dlm_memory_init() 

>> My initial purpose is to replace kmem_cache_create() with KMEM_CACHE().
>
>Do you take any help from advanced analysis tools into account
>for such transformation attempts?
>
>Example for the semantic patch language (Coccinelle software):
>[PATCH v2] Coccinelle: api: Add SmPL script “use_KMEM_CACHE.cocci”
>https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/b08603d6-cac1-4876-a56c-30c680d5dc52@web.de/
>https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2024-02/msg00000.html
>
>
>> In my view，there is no problem in unifying passed name strings and
>> structure identifiers.
>> Maybe that's wrong，
>
>I suggest to take another look also at feedback which other contributors
>(from your Linux software distribution) got for similar change suggestions.
>
>
>> I will resubmit a patch that does not change "dlm_cb" to "dlm_callback".
>
>Do you see further opportunities to improve the change description accordingly?
>https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc4#n94

So grateful for you suggestion and I will definitely consider it.

thanks,
Hongfu Li