linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] vmalloc.c: fix double error checking

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: <1247013611.2597.22.camel@myhost>
Date:	Wed, 08 Jul 2009 08:40:06 +0800
From:	"Figo.zhang" <figo1802@...il.com>
To:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmalloc.c: fix double error checking

On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 09:19 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Figo.zhang wrote:
> > it is no need for double error checking.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Figo.zhang <figo1802@...il.com>
> > -		err = vmap_pud_range(pgd, addr, next, prot, pages, &nr);
> > -		if (err)
> > -			break;
> > +		if (vmap_pud_range(pgd, addr, next, prot, pages, &nr))
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> 
> Wouldn't it be better to keep the error return value?

see the vmap_pud_range(), if suceed return 0, if error return "-ENOMEM",
so it had better use clearly logic if error directly return "-EOMEM",
avoid double checking.

Best,
Figo.zhang


> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> tejun

--
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/