netdev - Re: [PATCH 13/14] net: sched: use unique idr insert function in unlocked actions

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]

Date:   Sun, 20 May 2018 18:33:49 -0300
From:   Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To:     Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
Cc:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, keescook@...omium.org,
        Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org,
        Yevgeny Kliteynik <kliteyn@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/14] net: sched: use unique idr insert function in
 unlocked actions

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 12:13:06AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
> On Sun, May 20, 2018 at 1:20 AM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 05:27:14PM +0300, Vlad Buslov wrote:
> >> Substitute calls to action insert function with calls to action insert
> >> unique function that warns if insertion overwrites index in idr.
> >
> > I know this patch may be gone on V2, but a general comment, please use
> > the function names themselves instead of a textualized version. I.e.,
> > s/action insert unique/tcf_idr_insert_unique/
>
> disagree. While doing reviews I found out that if I ask the developer
> to use higher
> level / descriptive language and specifically to avoid putting
> variable / function names in
> patch titles and change logs, the quality gets ++ big time, vs if the
> developer is allowed to say
>
> net/mlx5: Changed add_vovo_bobo()
>
> Added variable do_it_right to add_vovo_bobo(), now we are terribly good.

In your example I agree that it is not helping and it is even allowing
such empty changelog, just as in the section I highlighted, the
descriptive language is also not helping IMHO.

I had to read it 3 times to make sure I wasn't missing a modifier word
when comparing the two functions and well, it's just saying
"Substitute calls to foo function to bar function". I don't see how
the textualized version helps in this case while, at least in this
one, I would have visually recognized the function names way faster.

Sounds like 2 bad examples for either approach.