linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -mm] cgroups: fix failure path in cgroup_write_event

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:	Wed, 24 Feb 2010 08:06:20 -0800
From:	Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>
To:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:	Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"containers@...ts.osdl.org" <containers@...ts.osdl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] cgroups: fix failure path in cgroup_write_event_control()

On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov
<kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>>
>> Using a single goto label to cleanup multi failure paths can
>> get things wrong quite easily, while multi labels makes the
>> code cleaner.
>
> I disagree.
> It's easer to make mistake on changing code with multi failure
> paths, if you want to move a code within function.

I'm on Kirill's side here. Being able to have a single "cleanup
everything" error path makes the code a lot more maintainable. It may
be inappropriate for really performance-critical functions, but that's
not the case here.

Paul
--
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/