linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: use common return path

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: <20151202050248.GC3692@sudip-pc>
Date:	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:32:49 +0530
From:	Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:	Ben Romer <benjamin.romer@...sys.com>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	sparmaintainer@...sys.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: unisys: use common return path

On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 06:57:24PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 09:54:50AM -0500, Ben Romer wrote:
> > On 12/01/2015 03:00 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > >Doing One Err style error handling is often a mistake but it's ok here.
> > 
> > Why is it okay here? I don't understand why this function would be
> > any different than the other places where the code used a goto.
> 
> What I meant was that I'm generally opposed to "common exit paths".
> Mixing all the exit paths together often makes the code more complicated
> and leads to errors.  That makes sense from a common sense perspective

By "common exit path" do you mean mixing up of success and error paths?

regards
sudip
--
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/