[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] virt: Add vboxguest driver for Virtual Box Guest integration

On 03-10-17 14:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 03, 2017 at 01:41:46PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 03-10-17 12:04, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>>> Looks like you forgot to CC previous revierers.
>>>> +#define CHECK_IOCTL_IN(req) \
>>>> +do { \
>>>> + if ((req)->Hdr.cbIn != (sizeof((req)->Hdr) + sizeof((req)->u.In)) || \
>>>> + (req)->Hdr.cbOut != sizeof((req)->Hdr)) \
>>>> + return -EINVAL; \
>>>> +} while (0)
>>> It seems like you ignored the comments on the last version.
>>> Get rid of the weird struct capilization.
>> The only capitalized structs are all from headers under include/uapi,
>> I can remove the capitalization without breaking the ABI, but if I
>> do that the VirtualBox Guest Additions userspace will no longer be
>> able to actually be compiled against the in kernel version of the
>> headers which seems undesirable.
>> Arnd, Greg KH, what is your opinion about this? I would like to
>> be able to actually compile the userspace consumer of this API
>> against the in kernel headers, I can change the struct names
>> (and drop the typedefs) if that is considered something which I
>> MUST fix to get this in mainline, but I would rather keep things
>> so that the userspace tools can be compiled against the in kernel
>> uapi headers.
> My opinion is that kernel code, including headers, needs to look like
> kernel code. None of this "but this single, tiny, driver is special and
> unique and gets to keep its bizarre coding style" stuff. The longevity
> of the developer community and codebase precludes that kind of "special
> treatment".
> And if userspace _really_ likes typedefs, then it's trivial for them to
> just have something like a list of:
> typedef struct virtual_box_check_ballon VBGLIOCCHECKBALLOON, *PVBGLIOCCHECKBALLOON;
> in their .h file that they use after they include these uapi headers.
> Remember, our coding style rules are there for a good reason, you want
> others to fix, maintain, and understand the code, for a long time. It's
> not just there because we like to be mean. It's your brain we care
> about :)
> So it should be fixed up.

Ok, will fix for v2.

>> This patch adds a single driver, so there is no sensible way to split
>> it up.
> It's 6k lines, split it at least by the file level, can you read this
> all in one sitting?
> try something like:
> - uapi header files
> - util functions
> - "linux" core
> - rest
> or something like that. Be considerate of those who have to read this
> stuff, you _want_ us to be happy to do so...

Ok, I will split this up for v2.



 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-04 11:33    [W:0.051 / U:18.456 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site