netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] inet: add READ_ONCE(sk->sk_bound_dev_if) in INET

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: <20220513101817.3f001a85@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 10:18:17 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] inet: add READ_ONCE(sk->sk_bound_dev_if) in
 INET_MATCH()

On Thu, 12 May 2022 10:14:23 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:02 AM Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net> wrote:
> 
> > When you convert the #define into an inline function, wouldn't it be
> > more natural to name it lower caps?
> >
> > static inline bool inet_match(struct net *net, ... )  
> 
> Sure, it is only a matter for us to remember all the past/present
> names, based on implementation details, especially at backport times.

We can apply as is if you prefer, but I'm not sure I follow TBH.
The prototype (arguments) of the function/macro have changed so there 
is nothing to be gained from not changing the name AFAICT, no?