linux-kernel - Re: [git pull] "big box" x86 changes, bootmem/sparsemem

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

Date:	Sat, 26 Apr 2008 12:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Yinghai Lu <yinghai.lu@....com>,
	Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>, jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org
Subject: Re: [git pull] "big box" x86 changes, bootmem/sparsemem

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA
> +	nid = phys_to_nid(phys);
> +	next_nid = phys_to_nid(phys + len - 1);
> +	if (nid == next_nid)
>  	reserve_bootmem_node(NODE_DATA(nid), phys, len, BOOTMEM_DEFAULT);
> -#else
> -	reserve_bootmem(phys, len, BOOTMEM_DEFAULT);
> +	else
>  #endif
> +	reserve_bootmem(phys, len, BOOTMEM_DEFAULT);
> +

Noticed this when just trying to read the code to see if it looks sensible 
(without looking at any real details).

Code like this is *not* acceptable.

We do proper indentations. Improperly indented code is buggy. It doesn't 
matter if the compiler might generate the same code with or without 
indentation, it's still totally unacceptable.

Having preprocessor conditionals that mix things up is not an excuse, and 
it might be an argument for not doing the conditional that way (ie maybe 
just make sure that when NUMA is not on, nid/next_nid will always be 
different, and in a way that the compiler can perhaps see statically that 
they are different - so that you can have the conditional there even with 
NUMA off, but the compiler will just fold it away?).

		Linus
--
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/