linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Use 'do {} while (0)' for empty flush_tlb_fix_spurious

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: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1112180158330.21784@swampdragon.chaosbits.net>
Date:	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 02:00:31 +0100 (CET)
From:	Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
cc:	x86@...nel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use 'do {} while (0)' for empty flush_tlb_fix_spurious_fault()
 macro

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011, Michel Lespinasse wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net> wrote:
> > If one builds the kernel with -Wempty-body one gets this warning:
> >
> >  mm/memory.c:3432:46: warning: suggest braces around empty body in an ‘if’ statement [-Wempty-body]
> >
> > due to the fact that 'flush_tlb_fix_spurious_fault' is a macro that
> > can sometimes be defined to nothing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>
> 
> Looks good to me. I'd be happy with either that or Al's alternative suggestion.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
> 
Thanks for the review.

I did see Al's suggestion and he does have a point. But since it doesn't 
actually matter much in this specific case I'd say "let's just go with 
this one - it matches what's done nearly everywhere else".
But, If someone disagrees strongly I'll cook up a different patch. :-)

-- 
Jesper Juhl <jj@...osbits.net>       http://www.chaosbits.net/
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please.