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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1277742.1606224090@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:21:30 +0000 From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 001/141] afs: Fix fall-through warnings for Clang Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote: > > My preference would be to fall through. The case number is the state machine > > state, as indexed by call->unmarshall. > > Then ideally the state machine states should be enums and not numbers > and the compiler should use a default block for unhandled states right? > > Is code like call->marshall++ a common style for kernel state machines? > Perhaps not. How the value is interpreted is unique to each delivery function, of which there are a number, since it counts out the separate parts of the xdr encoding for that particular RPC request or reply block. Maybe "state machine" isn't the right term. David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists