linux-kernel - Re: Linux 2.6.26-rc5

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:	Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Bjorn Helgaas <bjorn.helgaas@...com>
cc:	Alejandro Riveira Fernández 
	<ariveira@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.26-rc5



On Thu, 5 Jun 2008, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>  
>  	for (i = 0; (res = pnp_get_resource(dev, IORESOURCE_MEM, i)); i++) {
> -		if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED)
> +		if (res->flags & IORESOURCE_UNSET ||
> +		    res->flags & IORESOURCE_DISABLED)
>  			continue;

Umm. If I was a compiler, I'd be warning about this. You don't get a 
warning about suggesting parentheses around the '&'?

Also, regardless of lack of warnings, the natural way to do this is to 
just say

	if (res->flags & (IORESOURCE_DISABLED | IORESOURCE_UNSET))
		continue;

which is what any sane compiler would rewrite it to anyway, but since it's 
not just more readable for computers, but for humans too, why not do it 
that way?

			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/