linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: ext4

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:29:39 +0200
From:	Andreas Dilger <adilger@...ger.ca>
To:	Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: ext4_bread usage audit

On 2012-09-26, at 4:14 PM, Carlos Maiolino wrote:
> In regards to the coding style of if conditionals, I just followed the coding
> style of most places in the code, I also changed some of the if conditionals to
> match the rest of the code. i.e.:
> 
> if(!(bh = ext4_bread())) {
> 	do_something();
> }
> 
> if you take a look at the code, most if conditionals regarding the calls to
> ext4_bread() are in the above coding style. I just followed it, but, I'm not
> against change that to another one, but agree the above looks better and save
> some code lines.

The reason that having assignments in conditionals is bad is that it allows
hard-to-find bugs to be in the code:

        if ((bh == ext4_bread())

and

        if ((bh = ext4_bread())

look very similar to the reader, but the use of extra "()" around the
assignment quiets any compiler warnings about incorrect assignments.
In this specific case you _do_ want the assignment to bh, but in many
other cases you do not:

        if (bh = NULL)

would set bh to NULL instead of comparing it, and is IMHO bad coding style.

Cheers, Andreas





--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html