linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource/drivers/tango-xtal: Fix incorrect test

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, 19 Apr 2016 16:05:19 +0200
From:	Mason <slash.tmp@...e.fr>
To:	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Sebastian Frias <sf84@...oste.net>,
	Mans Rullgard <mans@...sr.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource/drivers/tango-xtal: Fix incorrect test

On 19/04/2016 15:13, Daniel Lezcano wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 02:15:15PM +0200, Mason wrote:
>
>> From: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@...madesigns.com>
>>
>> Commit 0881841f7e78 changed "if (ret != 0)" to "if (!ret)"
>>
>> Fixes: 0881841f7e78 ("Replace code by clocksource_mmio_init")
>> Signed-off-by: Marc Gonzalez <marc_gonzalez@...madesigns.com>
>> ---
> 
> Please resend the patch with the fix only, without s/ret/err/

As I wrote on IRC, I think it is misguided to consider variable
renaming as not part of the fix. A properly named variable helps
reviewers by communicating intent.

Had I named the variable 'err' in the first place, would you have
introduced the bug by writing

  if (!err) {
    pr_err("registration failed");
  }

or would if (!err) have jumped out for an error path?
(Not a rhetorical question; if you say it would not have helped,
then I guess my mental workflow is different.)

How do others feel about this? Thomas?

Regards.