linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2.6.18-rc4-mm3 2/2] fs/xfs: Correcting error-prone boolean-statement

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:	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/