netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] devlink: add by-instance dump infra

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:   Fri, 6 Jan 2023 13:12:14 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 13/14] devlink: add by-instance dump infra

On Fri, 6 Jan 2023 09:56:36 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Oh, just the "it" at the end? Sorry, I don't see the point.  
> 
> The point is simple. Ops is a struct of callback by name X. If someone
> implements this ops struct, it is nice to assign the callbacks functions
> of name y_X so it is obvious from the first sight, what the function
> is related to.
> 
> I'm not sure what's wrong about having this sort of consistency. I
> believe that you as a maintainer should rather enforce it than to be
> against it. Am I missing something?

IMO you have a tendency to form names by concatenating adjacent
information rather than reflecting on what matters to the reader.
I believe the low readability of the devlink code is sufficient 
evidence to disagree with that direction.