From: Andy Shevchenko <andy@kernel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] wcslen() prototype in string.h
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 19:05:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z-LiWDbrEvVaTLZU@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250325165847.GA2603000@ax162>
On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 09:58:47AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 06:17:34PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 25, 2025 at 08:45:19AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
...
> > > Rename the efi function to avoid the conflict.
> >
> > Hmm... Why not split this to two, rename patch as a standalone makes sense to
> > me even outside of this series.
>
> How so? If nls.h is not included in printk.c via string.h, which does
> not happen without this series, what value does the rename have? I do
> not mind splitting it up that way to keep things cleaner, I am just
> wondering what would be the justification in the changelog (I guess just
> that nls.h may get included in the future for some reason)?
Inside this series the justification is obvious (a.k.a. the same), outside
yes something like "Put EFI specific function to the respective namespace
to avoid potential clash in the future when including another header."
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-25 17:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-25 15:45 [PATCH 0/2] string.c: Add wcslen() Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-25 15:45 ` [PATCH 1/2] lib/string.c: " Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-25 15:45 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] wcslen() prototype in string.h Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-25 16:17 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-25 16:58 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-25 17:05 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2025-03-25 21:45 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-26 0:33 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-26 8:59 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-26 15:37 ` Nathan Chancellor
2025-03-26 15:43 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-26 8:52 ` Andy Shevchenko
2025-03-25 23:55 ` kernel test robot
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=Z-LiWDbrEvVaTLZU@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andy@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=nick.desaulniers+lkml@gmail.com \
/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