linux-kernel - Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register

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: <1452199320.4028.46.camel@perches.com>
Date:	Thu, 07 Jan 2016 12:42:00 -0800
From:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:	Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Sunil Goutham <sgoutham@...ium.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: net-thunder: One check less in nicvf_register_interrupts()
 after error detection

On Thu, 2016-01-07 at 21:38 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > Some prefer that source code be "templatized" regardless
> > of the number of exit points that any particular use of a
> > specific function type.
[]
> > Some of your patches are converting these templatized
> > functions to a different form for no added value.
> 
> Would you like to distinguish a bit more between my evolving
> collection of update suggestions and the concrete proposal
> for the function "nicvf_register_interrupts"?

No.

> > These patches make the local source code inconsistent
> > and generally goes against the authors preferred style.
> 
> Which programming approach will be the leading one here finally?

Whatever the developer wants.

There is no _best_ or _only_ style for this.