netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v5 02/10] octeontx2-pf: RVU representor driver

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: <ac47a370-99ca-4fb9-8fb0-800894d04c57@web.de>
Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 17:11:53 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Geetha sowjanya <gakula@...vell.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Hariprasad Kelam
 <hkelam@...vell.com>, Subbaraya Sundeep Bhatta <sbhatta@...vell.com>,
 Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 02/10] octeontx2-pf: RVU representor driver

> This patch adds basic driver for the RVU representor.
…

Please improve such a change description with imperative wordings.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc3#n94

Can an adjusted summary phrase become also a bit more helpful?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/Documentation/process/maintainer-tip.rst#L124

…
> +static int rvu_get_rep_cnt(struct otx2_nic *priv)
> +{
…
> +	mutex_lock(&priv->mbox.lock);
> +	req = otx2_mbox_alloc_msg_get_rep_cnt(&priv->mbox);
…
> +exit:
> +	mutex_unlock(&priv->mbox.lock);
> +	return err;
> +}
…

Would you become interested to apply a statement like “guard(mutex)(&priv->mbox.lock);”?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc3/source/include/linux/mutex.h#L196

…
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeontx2/nic/rep.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
…
> +#ifndef REP_H
> +#define REP_H
…

Can unique include guards be more desirable also for this software?

Regards,
Markus