netdev - Re: [net-next 3/7] ixgbe: Use static inlines instead of macros

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: <8566589F-17E2-47D4-AD38-1D42C6851642@intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:46:33 +0000
From:	"Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	Scott Feldman <sfeldma@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	"Brown, Aaron F" <aaron.f.brown@...el.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>,
	"sassmann@...hat.com" <sassmann@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 3/7] ixgbe: Use static inlines instead of macros

On Jan 9, 2014, at 12:19 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: "Rustad, Mark D" <mark.d.rustad@...el.com>
> Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2014 20:14:51 +0000

I'm sorry you dropped my entire procedural argument for not combining the changing of the case with the implementation of the static inlines. That really was and is important! I'm not opposed to changing the case. My concern is for procedurally when and how it gets done.

>> Obviously I could do it here, but I *really* think it is
>> procedurally a really bad idea to change the case as part of a
>> functional change. I thought I was doing a favor my at least making
>> them inlines, but prehaps not.
> 
> It is never a good idea to allow functions to have all caps
> names and vice versa.  Please don't use "difficulty" as a reason
> to violate this.
> 
> Doing things right is sometimes hard, I'm sorry to inform you :)

It is just that sometimes things take multiple steps. This was just one step. I'm sorry that I may have not made that clear enough. Doing the work is absolutely not the problem, managing the process so everyone can continue working is a concern.

>> Anyone want to take on changing the upper case static inlines in
>> mcf8390, 7990, benet, ns83820, s2io, vxge, iwlwifi, ath9k, wil6210,
>> mwifiex, and rtlwifi? And those are just under drivers/net.
> 
> Sorry the "crap exists elsewhere, therefore I can make crap too"
> argument never holds any water.
> 
> Just because crap exists elsewhere, doesn't mean you should duplicate it.

I'm sorry that the presence misled me into thinking that it was acceptable at least in a transitional phase.

I think I have found a way to address the barrier issue. I will add upper case macros that call the lower case inlines, so for a time both forms may exist, and then have a patch that will update the call sites, and then a patch to remove the macros.

Is that acceptable?

If only one person were working in this area and everything were serial, it would be much easier to manage this kind of change. When that is not the case, it is better for things to happen in separate steps.

-- 
Mark Rustad, Networking Division, Intel Corporation

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (842 bytes)