Building the Linux kernel with Clang and LLVM
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

      reply	other threads:[~2026-10-15  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ 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 1/2] Compiler Attributes: Add __require_explicit_initialization macro Kees Cook
2026-10-14 23:44   ` Nathan Chancellor
2026-10-15  5:18   ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
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