linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] net-qmi_wwan: Refactoring for qmi_wwan

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: <87vb7bpsq1.fsf@nemi.mork.no>
Date:	Sat, 02 Jan 2016 22:38:30 +0100
From:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net-qmi_wwan: Refactoring for qmi_wwan_bind()

SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> writes:

> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Fri, 1 Jan 2016 17:32:07 +0100
>
> Reduce the scope for the local variable "desc" to one branch
> of an if statement.

This patch is harmless.  But is also pointless.

You could at least try to explain why this must be changed.  I'm not
interested in why you think it is better this way - I might agree with
that.  what I am interested in is the advantage changing the code gives
us.  Some analysis of the risk and work involved would also be nice.  Is
this change really worth it?

Personally I am convinced that I wasted any time I used writing this,
and you wasted any time you used reading it.  Sorry.

Note:  This patch would have been fine if it was a natural part of some
*improvement* of the driver, i.e. a bugfix or feaure addition. As a
standalone patch I see it as noise.

Please stop the noise and start writing something useful.  I'm sure you
can fix bugs instead.  Wouldn't that be more interesting?  More
challenging?  These mindless robotic code refactoring patches are really
best left for robots.

Bjørn
--
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/