linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] linux/string.h: Introduce streq macro.

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: <20110427145209.GJ9486@thunk.org>
Date:	Wed, 27 Apr 2011 10:52:09 -0400
From:	Ted Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To:	gmack@...erfire.net
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Thiago Farina <tfransosi@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] linux/string.h: Introduce streq macro.

On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 04:47:40AM -0400, gmack@...erfire.net wrote:
> Knowing about it and not screwing it up are two different things. I was 
> working on a project a few years ago and we made this exact change thanks 
> to the backwards logic of strcmp constantly screwing people up and the bug 
> count went down considerably.

If someone could even vaguely possibly screw up strcmp(), I don't want
them submitting patches to my subsystem.  I'm generally worried about
far more subtle bugs (deadlocks, locking screwups), and as Christoph
said, if you can't notice a strcmp bug, there's something
***seriousl**** wrong with your code review process, test suite,
testing discpline, or all of the above.

I would consider patches to change !strcmp() to streq() in any code I
maintain to be worse noise than spelling patches, or whitespace
patches.

						- Ted
--
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/