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: <230bd4a1-7ccf-479e-acbb-8eb8440ec0e1@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2026 00:28:48 +0100
From: "Pratyush Yadav" <pratyush@...nel.org>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: "Brian Norris" <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
 "Kamal Dasu" <kamal.dasu@...adcom.com>,
 "Broadcom internal kernel review list" <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
 "Miquel Raynal" <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
 "Richard Weinberger" <richard@....at>,
 "Vignesh Raghavendra" <vigneshr@...com>,
 "Harvey Hunt" <harveyhuntnexus@...il.com>,
 "Paul Cercueil" <paul@...pouillou.net>,
 "Manivannan Sadhasivam" <mani@...nel.org>, "Stefan Agner" <stefan@...er.ch>,
 "Tudor Ambarus" <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
 "Michael Walle" <mwalle@...nel.org>, "Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@...nel.org>,
 "Nick Desaulniers" <nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com>,
 "Bill Wendling" <morbo@...gle.com>, "Justin Stitt" <justinstitt@...gle.com>,
 linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] mtd: spi-nor: hisi-sfc: Simplify with scoped for each OF child
 loop

(writing from my phone so please excuse the formatting)

On Sat, Jan 3, 2026, at 1:38 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 02/01/2026 14:33, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>> Hi Kyzystof,
>> 
>> Thanks for the cleanup.
>> 
>> On Fri, Jan 02 2026, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> 
>>> Use scoped for-each loop when iterating over device nodes to make code a
>>> bit simpler.
>> 
>> Nit: the commit message is a bit too dry. I had to go and look what the
>> difference between the two variants was. I could make an educated guess
>> by looking at the patch, but still.
>
> Really? That's old and widely used syntax, replaced so many times and
> sorry, but really obvious.
>
> We should not explain core kernel API in commit msgs, except maybe first
> months of usage.

Dunno. It's the first time I'm seeing these. So this was my first reaction. I think the patch would read nicer if you explain why the new variant is better even if it is widely used.

Anyway, I don't want to waste either of our energy arguing this, so if you don't want to add the one liner, that's fine by me too.

>> 
>> If you end up doing a v2, a one-liner explanation of the difference
>> between the two loop variants would be nice to have.

-- 
Regards,
Pratyush Yadav

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ