linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] staging/rtl8192u: fix coding style problems

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: <CAHdPZaMH1vJPsFmGFrrpWNtCxuY+S35-w2j+gbiiE=7jVKLtUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 24 Jun 2012 00:04:12 +0530
From:	"devendra.aaru" <devendra.aaru@...il.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@...il.com>,
	devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] staging/rtl8192u: fix coding style problems

Hi Joe,

On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 4:48 AM, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 16:08 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:35:42AM +0530, Devendra Naga wrote:
>> > fixed some of the coding style problems reported by checkpatch
> []
>> > @@ -66,11 +69,10 @@ short eprom_r(struct net_device *dev)
>> >  {
>> >     short bit;
>> >
>> > -   bit=(read_nic_byte_E(dev, EPROM_CMD) & (1<<EPROM_R_SHIFT) );
>> > +   bit = (read_nic_byte_E(dev, EPROM_CMD) & (1<<EPROM_R_SHIFT));
>> >     udelay(EPROM_DELAY);
>> >
>> > -   if(bit) return 1;
>> > -   return 0;
>> > +   return !!bit;
>>
>> Oh come on, really?  !! is more "clear" here?
>
> Depends on the reader.  !! is pretty common.
>
>> No, please be painfully obvious, that's the only way to write kernel
>> code.  Not like this.
>
> I'd just make the return a bool instead.
>
 taking another variable and assign it like bool ret = !!bit, and
returning ret?, i think this doesn't look better.
> Also, there are unnecessary parens that could
> be removed to make the code clearer.
>
> (1<<EPROM_R_SHIFT), (1<<EPROM_W_SHIFT) and
> (1<<EPROM_CK_SHIFT) could be new #defines too.
>
>
Will do.

thanks joe.


Devendra.
--
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/