linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86_64 boot -v2: Add linked list of struct setup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:31:55 -0500
From:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
To:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, andi@...stfloor.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86_64 boot -v2: Add linked list of struct
 setup_data

Huang wrote:
> +/* setup data types */
> +#define SETUP_NONE			0

This define seems unused?

Actually, what use would it ever have?  Should not every
struct setup_data on the setup_data linked list have a
valid (not NONE) type?  And perhaps that switch statement
that confused me:

> +		switch (data->type) {
> +		default:
> +			break;
> +		}

should not "break" silently on an unrecognized data->type, but
rather complain bitterly?

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@....com> 1.940.382.4214
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/