linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/18] Input - Fix make coccicheck warnings

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:	Sat, 3 Oct 2015 13:13:23 +0200
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ferruh Yigit <fery@...ress.com>,
	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>,
	Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>,
	Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@...com>,
	Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@...escale.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>,
	Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
	Shailendra Verma <shailendra.capricorn@...il.com>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Duson Lin <dusonlin@....com.tw>,
	Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>,
	Henrik Rydberg <rydberg@...math.org>,
	Daniel Mack <linux@...que.org>,
	Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@...ev.co.uk>,
	Matt Ranostay <mranostay@...il.com>,
	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/18] Input - Fix make coccicheck warnings

Hello Dmitry,

On 10/02/2015 08:25 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Javier,
> 
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 03:40:11PM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
>> Hello Dmitry,
>>
>> This series contains trivial patches with fixes to different warnings
>> reported by make coccichek M=drivers/input.
>>
>> The patches don't contain functional changes but makes the functions
>> simpler and removes unnecessary lines of code.
> 
> I disagree with some "simplify function return logic" patches: when
> there are several actions that may fail I prefer explicit:
> 
> 	error = actionN();
> 	if (error)
> 		return error;
> 
> 	return 0;
> 
> even on the last one as it keep with the code flow and makes it easier
> to move stuff around.
>
> Please consider patches that not explicitly replied to as applied a
> dropped.

Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain this. I understand your
rationale and I tend to agree.

I'll see if the scripts/coccinelle/misc/simple_return.cocci semantic
patch can be modified to take this into account and not report a
warning for that pattern.

> 
> Thanks.
> 

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
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/