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: <2ace33f8-5596-4b4b-9ab9-e7c0fffa990b@web.de>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:24:44 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Luke Jones <luke@...nes.dev>, 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

>> 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_

Such a naming approach is “popular”, isn't it?


> 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.

I dare to propose possibilities to take safer identifier selections better into account.
I hope that we can benefit more from corresponding collateral evolution.

Regards,
Markus