linux-kernel - Re: thunderbolt: Deletion of unnecessary checks before the function call "ring

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: <1416769586.6651.49.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Sun, 23 Nov 2014 11:06:26 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
	Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: thunderbolt: Deletion of unnecessary checks before the function
 call "ring_free"

On Sun, 2014-11-23 at 20:03 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Why not just make the static source code analysis aware of the problem?
> 
> This is also possible, of course.
> 
> 
> > You can treat static functions differently that non-static ones.
> 
> I have added this detail to my ideas around the next fine-tuning
> for the published semantic patch approach.
> 
> 
> > There is no need to change the code.
> 
> Can name space prefixes help to make source code a bit safer eventually?

Not really.
Adding prefixes can make code unnecessarily more verbose though.

--
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/