linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fixed to codestyle

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:   Mon, 12 Dec 2016 12:35:28 -0600
From:   Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Ozgur Karatas <okaratas@...ber.fsf.org>, david@...morbit.com
Cc:     linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Fixed to codestyle



On 12/12/16 12:14 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-12-12 at 07:49 -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> On 12/12/16 4:53 AM, Ozgur Karatas wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I have error to use uuid and I think the functions should be used when -i'm eye-catching- "(* uuid)".
>>> I tested it.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Ozgur Karatas <okaratas@...ber.fsf.org>
>>
>> NAK
>>
>> This doesn't fix code style at all; there is no need and no
>> precedence for i.e. (*uuid) in function arguments in the xfs code,
>> and you have broken indentation in the loop within the function.
> 
> Perhaps better would be to convert the xfs uuid_t typedef
> to the include/uapi/linux/uuid.h appropriate struct and
> maybe use a comparison to NULL_UUID_<type>
> 
>>> diff --git a/fs/xfs/uuid.c b/fs/xfs/uuid.c
> []
>>> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ typedef struct {
>>>   * it just something that's needed for user-level file handles.
>>>   */
>>>  void
>>> -uuid_getnodeuniq(uuid_t *uuid, int fsid [2])
>>> +uuid_getnodeuniq(uuid_t (*uuid), int fsid [2])
> 
> And to amplify Eric's comment:
> 
> that bit is confusing as it makes uuid look
> like a function pointer.
> 
>>>  {
>>>  	xfs_uu_t *uup = (xfs_uu_t *)uuid;
>>>  
>>> @@ -51,8 +51,8 @@ uuid_is_nil(uuid_t *uuid)
>>>  	if (uuid == NULL)
>>>  		return 0;
>>>  	/* implied check of version number here... */
>>> -	for (i = 0; i < sizeof *uuid; i++)
>>> -		if (*cp++) return 0;	/* not nil */
>>> +	for (i = 0; i < sizeof (*uuid); i++) 
>>> +	if (*cp++) return 0;	/* not nil */
> 
> There shouldn't be a space after sizeof.

and the "if" /should/ be indented under the for loop, because
it is within the loop...

I suppose simply:

-	for (i = 0; i < sizeof *uuid; i++)
+	for (i = 0; i < sizeof(*uuid); i++) 

would be fine on its own, though, because that is a bit
unusual/inconsistent.  I'll admit that I didn't spot
that change as I scanned over the unnecessary & incorrect parts
of the first patch. :)

thanks,
-Eric

>>>  	return 1;	/* is nil */
>>>  }
>>>
>