linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] timerfd: Factor out timer-type unspecific timerfd

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]

Date:	Thu, 20 Feb 2014 11:52:03 +0100 (CET)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@...sung.com>
cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, john.stultz@...aro.org,
	Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>, anton@...sg.org,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com, cw00.choi@...sung.com,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] timerfd: Factor out timer-type unspecific
 timerfd_expire()

On Thu, 20 Feb 2014, Alexey Perevalov wrote:

> From: Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>
> 
> There is nothing hrtimer-specific inside the timerfd_tmrproc(), except
> the function prototype. We're about to add other timer types, so factor
> out generic timerfd_expire() helper from timerfd_tmrproc().

This changelog is completely useless. How is timerfd_tmrproc, which is
not a function but a function pointer, related to the patch?

Moving duplicated code to a common function is nice, but ....
 
> Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <anton.vorontsov@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Alexey Perevalov <a.perevalov@...sung.com>
> ---
>  fs/timerfd.c |   40 +++++++++++++++++++---------------------
>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/timerfd.c b/fs/timerfd.c
> index 9293121..3561ce7 100644
> --- a/fs/timerfd.c
> +++ b/fs/timerfd.c
> @@ -229,6 +229,23 @@ static unsigned int timerfd_poll(struct file *file, poll_table *wait)
>  	return events;
>  }
>  
> +static u64 timerfd_rearm(struct timerfd_ctx *ctx)
> +{
> +	u64 orun;
> +
> +	if (isalarm(ctx)) {
> +		orun += alarm_forward_now(
> +			&ctx->t.alarm, ctx->tintv) - 1;
> +		alarm_restart(&ctx->t.alarm);
> +	} else {
> +		orun += hrtimer_forward_now(&ctx->t.tmr,
> +		     ctx->tintv) - 1;
> +		hrtimer_restart(&ctx->t.tmr);

Warnings are there to be ignored and testing of user space
interfaces after a change is overrated, right?

Aside of that you just blindly copied the original code w/o fixing up
the now unnecessary line breaks.

The summary of this patch is:

    1) Breaks existing functionality including user space ABI
    2) Compiler warnings ignored
    3) Untested
    4) Utter lack of programming style
    5) Useless changelog

Impressive for a trivial thing like this.

Thanks,

	tglx
--
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/