| 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: <44F78A67.1060007@student.ltu.se> Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2006 03:18:31 +0200 From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> To: Nathan Scott <nathans@....com> CC: akpm@...l.org, xfs-masters@....sgi.com, xfs@....sgi.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Correcting error-prone boolean-statement Nathan Scott wrote: >On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 01:52:51AM +0200, Richard Knutsson wrote: > > >>From: Richard Knutsson <ricknu-0@...dent.ltu.se> >> >>Converting error-prone statement: >>"if (var == B_FALSE)" into "if (!var)" >>"if (var == B_TRUE)" into "if (var)" >> >> > >This is my preference too, rather than the local boolean usage which >isn't used with any consistency... but: > > > >>Compile-tested >> >> > >Are you using XFS on your systems? What is your strategy for getting this >runtime tested going to be? Or are you delegating that responsibility? :) > > Sorry, can't say that I do. So pretty please... ;) Seriously, I can not find a state when this may fail (if not "if (var == TRUE)" happend to be correct for 'var' != 0 != 1, but that is just a bug waiting to happend). But please correct me if I am wrong. >cheers. > > cu - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists