| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1328899861.14197.7.camel@joe2Laptop> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:51:01 -0800 From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> To: dedekind1@...il.com Cc: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>, Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>, bruce.w.allan@...el.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cocci@...u.dk, Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk> Subject: Re: [Cocci] Re: [PATCH] scripts/coccinelle/misc/boolinit.cocci: semantic patch for bool issues On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 20:44 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 09:45 -0800, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 18:11 +0100, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > From: Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr> > > Thanks Julia. It seems to work well. > I wonder though, why would we want to change if (a == true) with if (a) > etc? Julia did not provide the explanation in the commit message but > referred to you and Rusty in the semantic patch. Testing booleans against specific values is poor form. booleans should be tested or !tested. If you are going to submit these patches, I suggest you break them out by 2nd level directory. patch 1: drivers/foo/... patch 2: drivers/bar/... ... patch n: drivers/baz/... and cc: trivial@...nel.org -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists