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:	Tue, 22 Apr 2014 22:25:45 -0700
From:	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
To:	"Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk.manpages@...il.com>
Cc:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	gthelen@...gle.com, aswin@...com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/4] ipc,shm: minor cleanups

On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 07:07 +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 04:53 AM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > -  Breakup long function names/args.
> > -  Cleaup variable declaration.
> > -  s/current->mm/mm
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
> > ---
> >  ipc/shm.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/ipc/shm.c b/ipc/shm.c
> > index f000696..584d02e 100644
> > --- a/ipc/shm.c
> > +++ b/ipc/shm.c
> > @@ -480,15 +480,13 @@ static const struct vm_operations_struct shm_vm_ops = {
> >  static int newseg(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct ipc_params *params)
> >  {
> >  	key_t key = params->key;
> > -	int shmflg = params->flg;
> > +	int id, error, shmflg = params->flg;
> 
> It's largely a matter of taste (and I may be in a minority), and I know
> there's certainly precedent in the kernel code, but I don't much like the 
> style of mixing variable declarations that have initializers, with other
> unrelated declarations (e.g., variables without initializers). What is 
> the gain? One less line of text? That's (IMO) more than offset by the 
> small loss of readability.

Yes, it's taste. And yes, your in the minority, at least in many core
kernel components and ipc.

Thanks,
Davidlohr

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ