Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <a291cce3ff1ba978e7ad231a8e1b7d82f6164e86.camel@perches.com>
 <20200406023700.1367-1-longman@redhat.com> <319765.1586188840@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <d509771b7e08fff0d18654b746e413e93ed62fe8.camel@perches.com>
 <CAHk-=whgvhyi_=2AsfFLUznqmrO9TOjuzTvcYHvCC=f0+Y7PkQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <adc76d7c441e8f10697b61ceaff66207fb219886.camel@perches.com>
 <CAHk-=wgyt8j5rEnyKE8YdrRjQof1kvyom1CensTE0-Bp-meGnA@mail.gmail.com> <7eb36a794df38c885689085618a8a4ff9df3dd2c.camel@perches.com>
In-Reply-To: <7eb36a794df38c885689085618a8a4ff9df3dd2c.camel@perches.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:33:35 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wj=zTfrjXbFp+yhMpjH5jyx=t5fcDVmYN6KpE9Tjxb9YA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add kvfree_sensitive() for freeing sensitive data objects
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, keyrings@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 6, 2020 at 10:22 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> API function naming symmetry is good.

BS.

Naming should be symmetric if _use_ is symmetric.

But if the use is completely different, then the naming should be
completely different too.

A symmetric naming is only helpful if it implies symmetries in use.
Otherwise it's actively misleading.

In "kzalloc()", the z is meaningful and an important part of what the
caller wants.

In "kzfree()", the z is actively detrimental, because maybe in the
future we really _might_ want to use that "memfill(0xdeadbeef)" or
something. The "zero" part of the interface isn't even _relevant_.

See? There is no API symmetry. There is only a small and immaterial
implementation detail.

We don't put an "l" into the kfree/kmalloc names because they
internally use a percpu list to manage the allocations, do we? That's
a "symmetry" too. But it's an irrelevant implementation detail that
makes no sense to the caller.

           Linus