linux-kernel - Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Move four assignments in bpf_jit

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: <CAGRGNgVMtZ_dJYSrn+uVTxc6B8Fd+1RZY6dOkDdv9sVALii4vw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 4 Sep 2016 17:18:55 +1000
From:   Julian Calaby <julian.calaby@...il.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        sparclinux <sparclinux@...r.kernel.org>,
        Adam Buchbinder <adam.buchbinder@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: sparc: bpf_jit: Move four assignments in bpf_jit_compile()

Hi Markus,

On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 5:07 PM, SF Markus Elfring
<elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> I really wish he'd concentrate on the former rather than the latter.
>
> I am on the way for such a software development adventure.
> There are further improvement opportunities to consider besides the main route,
> aren't there?

You're missing the point here. Find something useful to change.

People are going through the kernel finding functions that should be
static for example - this is useful as it provides better
documentation for those functions (static == not used outside this
file) and fixes errors reported by GCC and static code checkers. Those
changes are useful.

Another useful change would be ensuring that every struct that has a
bool member is kzalloc'd instead of kmalloc'd as this eliminates a
possible source of undefined behaviour. (A bool is effectively a u8
with behaviour defined for when that value is 0 or 1, kmalloc'd memory
can have any data in it, therefore it's possible and likely that a
kmalloc'd struct with a bool member will end up with some value for
that member that isn't 0 or 1. kzalloc eliminates this possibility.)

Moving four assignments because you think they might improve stuff is
just annoying people.

>> He's not another Nick Krause.
>
> Are you going to remember me under an other nickname anyhow?

Nick Krause submitted patches that make yours look good. At least yours compile.

Thanks,

-- 
Julian Calaby

Email: julian.calaby@...il.com
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/