linux-kernel - Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/11] [CLEANUP] trace-cmd: Split out binding a port and fork reader from open

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <521C5E8A.4020308@hitachi.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 Aug 2013 17:08:42 +0900
From:	Yoshihiro YUNOMAE <yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Hidehiro Kawai <hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yrl.pp-manager.tt@...achi.com
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH 07/11] [CLEANUP] trace-cmd: Split out binding
 a port and fork reader from open_udp()

(2013/08/26 23:37), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Aug 2013 10:48:15 +0900
> Yoshihiro YUNOMAE <yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>> +static int open_udp(const char *node, const char *port, int *pid,
>>>> +		    int cpu, int pagesize, int start_port)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	int sfd;
>>>> +	int num_port;
>>>> +
>>>> +	num_port = udp_bind_a_port(start_port, &sfd);
>>>> +	if (num_port < 0)
>>>> +		return num_port;
>>>
>>> I don't see how num_port could be less than zero.
>>
>> I think so, but trace-cmd checks whether udp_port is less than zero or
>> not in create_all_readers().
>>
>> May I submit the removal patch?
>
> It's not a critical path, the check is fine. As there was a check, I
> was thinking that you were expecting it to pass an error which it never
> did.
>
> Perhaps just add a comment stating that udp_bind_a_port() currently
> does not return an error, but if that changes in the future, we have a
> check for it now.
>
> That way a reviewer of the code does not get confused by it.

OK, I'll delete the check and add comment as follows:

/*
  * udp_bind_a_port() currently does not return an error, but if that
  * changes in the future, we have a check for it now.
  */
num_port = udp_bind_a_port(start_port, &sfd);

Thanks,
Yoshihiro YUNOMAE

-- 
Yoshihiro YUNOMAE
Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: yoshihiro.yunomae.ez@...achi.com


--
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/