From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] seq_file: Require explicit initialization of struct seq_operations
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 10:47:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2026101515-oversleep-related-e4dd@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANiq72=wS5NJyeKKaYiHKWhDq2Wjk728qkCUNq4xVoHrPEPCRw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 15, 2026 at 09:47:34AM +0200, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 15, 2026 at 9:11 AM Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> >
> > __must_init might be smaller?
>
> That sounds fine too. I like that it says that something *has* to be
> done (like the original name did). Hmm... On the other hand, I guess
> "must" could sound like one has to initialize the field "somehow",
> i.e. writing:
>
> struct S s = {};
>
> definitely initializes it, yet the compiler would warn. Would
> "explicit" hint a bit more at the fact that one has to actually
> "write" the field, even if it may have been initialized anyway?
"explicit" is a description, "must" is an action that tells the reader
what they have to do, so maybe "must" is better?
Anyway, I don't care, naming is hard, either is fine with me, I'll let
the authors of the patch here pick what they want :)
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-15 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-14 22:58 [PATCH 0/2] Add __require_explicit_initialization and its first user Kees Cook
2026-10-14 22:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] seq_file: Require explicit initialization of struct seq_operations Kees Cook
2026-10-15 5:21 ` Greg KH
2026-10-15 5:46 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-10-15 5:57 ` Kees Cook
2026-10-15 7:11 ` Greg KH
2026-10-15 7:47 ` Miguel Ojeda
2026-10-15 8:47 ` Greg KH [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2026101515-oversleep-related-e4dd@gregkh \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox