linux-kernel - Re: [v4 3/9] platform/x86: asus-armoury: move existing tunings to asus-armoury module

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: <03cfc83f-6f19-436f-9896-78fd6b8cd8f7@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 19:05:05 +1200
From: "Luke Jones" <luke@...nes.dev>
To: "Markus Elfring" <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
 platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org,
 "Benjamin Tissoires" <bentiss@...nel.org>,
 "Corentin Chary" <corentin.chary@...il.com>,
 "Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
 Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
 "Jiri Kosina" <jikos@...nel.org>, "Mario Limonciello" <superm1@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v4 3/9] platform/x86: asus-armoury: move existing tunings to asus-armoury
 module

html a third time... I think I need to do something about that. Very very sorry.

On Fri, 27 Sep 2024, at 6:09 PM, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> …
> >>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-armoury.h
> >>> @@ -0,0 +1,146 @@
> >> …
> >>> +#ifndef _ASUS_BIOSCFG_H_
> >>> +#define _ASUS_BIOSCFG_H_
> >> …
> >>
> >> I suggest to omit leading underscores from such identifiers.
> >> https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/display/c/DCL37-C.+Do+not+declare+or+define+a+reserved+identifier
> …
> > the link is C standard, not kernel C right?
> 
> Advice is offered in such a direction.
> 
> 
> > Pretty much everything I look at in the kernel seems to use the leading underscores.
> 
> How much would you like to care for standard compliance concerns
> together with your software developments?

I only ask about because it seems to deviate from everything else I've viewed. For example the older `asus-wmi.h` has:

#ifndef _ASUS_WMI_H_
#define _ASUS_WMI_H_

and every other header in the drivers/platform/x86 dir is similar. If what I'm supposed to is omit the leading `_` then sure I'll do it, it's not of any consequence to me. But the difference gave me pause is all :)

Kind regards,
Luke.

> Regards,
> Markus
>