From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D0DAC001B2 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 15:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238916AbiLNP6M (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:58:12 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55984 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S238122AbiLNP51 (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Dec 2022 10:57:27 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06b.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8D93222B1; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 07:57:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1671033434; x=1702569434; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=5LFXBukgQPsSVobJ4TQvaAaS4znUymOqfbKoEQKnuF8=; b=E+ckExooB4bREp/WKswEEPddfmy6vnU0BLE2og4rz17i9GvWUK+yJU0M Fhe5aMBIMwEN8qyhY6ezagv9DP8KlU0vtmci7WljdbKY9rLLjol2Nk3xy Enh2voNRFcllcGHpbC6l73uDqeofyZz52fYoxRGVBpvaM0RbXN95FDCpj VAluPdVMacqYB0m5W6k60cMbZlnC9cU80KU0KWiZrx4lgRAtVrTwht3TK 5o+i2n6Z1kLjdmGOLAKhpGFFpgo+YTtHzrrH9MdFsvHhsnQYaE422npXk ElU0VPEEF6nyiApt091AlCnE1F0MGZuNgQYsqVmHpJkU0iHoWo+oKTTfB g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10561"; a="380640649" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,244,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="380640649" Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Dec 2022 07:57:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10561"; a="737738842" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.96,244,1665471600"; d="scan'208";a="737738842" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.54]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2022 07:57:11 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1p5U86-009t4i-01; Wed, 14 Dec 2022 17:57:10 +0200 Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2022 17:57:09 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Stanislaw Gruszka , david.keisarschm@mail.huji.ac.il, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Renaming weak prng invocations - prandom_bytes_state, prandom_u32_state Message-ID: References: <20221214123358.GA1062210@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 05:53:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 04:15:49PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 1:34 PM Stanislaw Gruszka > > wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 12, 2022 at 03:35:20PM +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: > > > > Please CC me on future revisions. > > > > > > > > As of 6.2, the prandom namespace is *only* for predictable randomness. > > > > There's no need to rename anything. So nack on this patch 1/5. > > > > > > It is not obvious (for casual developers like me) that p in prandom > > > stands for predictable. Some renaming would be useful IMHO. > > > > Renaming makes backports more complicated, because stable teams will > > have to 'undo' name changes. > > Stable teams are already overwhelmed by the amount of backports, and > > silly merge conflicts. > > > > Take another example : > > > > u64 timecounter_read(struct timecounter *tc) > > > > You would think this function would read the timecounter, right ? > > > > Well, it _updates_ many fields from @tc, so a 'better name' would also > > be useful. > > Right, at some point we become into the world of > > #define true 0 > > because... (read below) > > > linux kernel is not for casual readers. > > P.S. I believe you applied a common sense and in some cases > the renames are necessary. And before you become to a wrong conclusion by reading between the lines, no, I'm not taking either side (to rename or not to rename) in this case. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko