linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iop-adma: redundant/wrong tests in iop_*

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e9c3a7c21002281958u4ee6fb94p55b7c5069dd08be5@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:58:14 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>
Cc:	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iop-adma: redundant/wrong tests in iop_*_count()?

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com> wrote:
> When we reach the loop, len is at least 1, we only stay in the loop when
> len is at least MAX_BYTE_COUNT + 1, MAX_BYTE_COUNT is subtracted in each
> iteration. So when we leave the loop, or didn't take it, len is at least 1.
> Testing whether len is non-zero appears redundant.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>
> ---
> Or are the tests off by one? Then we'll need a different patch...

No, not off by one, just redundant.

Applied, thanks.

--
Dan
--
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/