Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:56:09AM +0800, zhang warden wrote: > > > > On May 7, 2024, at 10:41, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:21:40AM +0800, zhang warden wrote: > >> > >> > >>> > >>> transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not > >>> necessary at

Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

> On May 7, 2024, at 10:41, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > > On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:21:40AM +0800, zhang warden wrote: >> >> >>> >>> transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not >>> necessary at this point. >>> >> Sorry for my careless, the comment still remains in the code.

Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 10:21:40AM +0800, zhang warden wrote: > > > > > > transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not > > necessary at this point. > > > Sorry for my careless, the comment still remains in the code. However, > comment in the code do no harms here. Maybe it can

Re: [PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

> > transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not > necessary at this point. > Sorry for my careless, the comment still remains in the code. However, comment in the code do no harms here. Maybe it can be kept.

[PATCH 0/1] *** Replace KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* ***

From: Wardenjohn As the previous described, renaming variables is not a good idead becase it will break userspace. This patch rename macros of KLP_* to KLP_TRANSITION_* to fix the confusing description of the klp transition state. With this marcos renamed, comments are not necessary at this