linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/7] pci: doe: Replace sysfs visibility macro

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: <5546db361d2d474b97d80345473628d0e5a55093.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2025 11:13:22 -0700
From: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: corbet@....net, bhelgaas@...gle.com, kuurtb@...il.com, Hans de Goede
	 <hdegoede@...hat.com>, vkoul@...nel.org, yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com, 
	pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.dev, sanyog.r.kale@...el.com, Greg Kroah-Hartman
	 <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, 
	dakr@...nel.org, dan.j.williams@...el.com, Andy Shevchenko
	 <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML
	 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, 
	platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, Dell.Client.Kernel@...l.com, 
	linux-sound@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/7] pci: doe: Replace sysfs visibility macro

On Fri, 2025-04-25 at 13:57 +0300, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Apr 2025, David E. Box wrote:
> 
> > Replace deprecated DEFINE_SIMPLE_SYSFS_GROUP_VISIBLE() call with the new
> > DEFINE_SYSFS_GROUP_VISIBILITY() helper for the pci_doe_features_sysfs group
> > in drivers/pci/doe.c.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: David E. Box <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pci/doe.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/doe.c b/drivers/pci/doe.c
> > index aae9a8a00406..18b355506dc1 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/doe.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/doe.c
> > @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@ static bool pci_doe_features_sysfs_group_visible(struct
> > kobject *kobj)
> >  
> >  	return !xa_empty(&pdev->doe_mbs);
> >  }
> > -DEFINE_SIMPLE_SYSFS_GROUP_VISIBLE(pci_doe_features_sysfs)
> > +DEFINE_SYSFS_GROUP_VISIBILITY(pci_doe_features_sysfs)
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> Is it intentional to not have semicolon at the end?

Hi Ilpo,

I was just doing a straight name swap and didn't not notice the lack of a
semicolon. Of course, since DEFINE_SYSFS_GROUP_VISIBILITY() expands to a
function definition, a trailing semicolon isn't necessary.

I suspect the issue is with the other instances where it was added, which makes
the usage inconsistent. What would you suggest?

David