linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86_64 boot -v2: Add linked list of struct setup

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]

Message-Id: <1206924877.21451.6.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:54:37 +0800
From:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Paul Jackson <pj@....com>
Cc:	hpa@...or.com, andi@...stfloor.org, mingo@...hat.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] x86_64 boot -v2: Add linked list of struct
	setup_data

On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 23:31 -0500, Paul Jackson wrote:
> Huang wrote:
> > +/* setup data types */
> > +#define SETUP_NONE			0
> 
> This define seems unused?

I think this can prevent somebody to use 0 as type id.

> Actually, what use would it ever have?  Should not every
> struct setup_data on the setup_data linked list have a
> valid (not NONE) type?  And perhaps that switch statement
> that confused me:
> 
> > +		switch (data->type) {
> > +		default:
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> 
> should not "break" silently on an unrecognized data->type, but
> rather complain bitterly?

Yes. A warning should be made on unrecognized data->type.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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/