linux-kernel - Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: Remove ternary operator

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: <32230433-289b-b787-9a7a-9a897bf2f93c@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:44:13 -0400
From:   Jes Sorensen <jes.sorensen@...il.com>
To:     Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>,
        outreachy-kernel@...glegroups.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] Staging: rtl8188eu: Remove ternary
 operator

On 09/12/16 09:58, Bhumika Goyal wrote:
> Relational and logical operators evaluate to either true or false.
> Explicit conversion is not needed so remove the ternary operator.
> Done using coccinelle:
> 
> @r@
> expression A,B;
> symbol true,false;
> binary operator b = {==,!=,&&,||,>=,<=,>,<};
> @@
> - (A b B) ? true : false
> + A b B
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bhumika Goyal <bhumirks@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c | 8 ++++----
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/phy.c           | 2 +-
>  drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/rtl8188e_dm.c   | 3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> index 9544e55..b43f57be 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/core/rtw_mlme_ext.c
> @@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ static int issue_probereq_ex(struct adapter *padapter,
>  	unsigned long start = jiffies;
>  
>  	do {
> -		ret = issue_probereq(padapter, pssid, da, wait_ms > 0 ? true : false);
> +		ret = issue_probereq(padapter, pssid, da, wait_ms > 0);
>  
>  		i++;
>  
> @@ -1293,7 +1293,7 @@ int issue_nulldata(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char *da, unsigned int pow
>  		da = pnetwork->MacAddress;
>  
>  	do {
> -		ret = _issue_nulldata(padapter, da, power_mode, wait_ms > 0 ? true : false);
> +		ret = _issue_nulldata(padapter, da, power_mode, wait_ms > 0);
>  
>  		i++;
>  
> @@ -1420,7 +1420,7 @@ int issue_qos_nulldata(struct adapter *padapter, unsigned char *da, u16 tid, int
>  		da = pnetwork->MacAddress;
>  
>  	do {
> -		ret = _issue_qos_nulldata(padapter, da, tid, wait_ms > 0 ? true : false);
> +		ret = _issue_qos_nulldata(padapter, da, tid, wait_ms > 0);
>  
>  		i++;
>  
> @@ -1527,7 +1527,7 @@ static int issue_deauth_ex(struct adapter *padapter, u8 *da,
>  	unsigned long start = jiffies;
>  
>  	do {
> -		ret = _issue_deauth(padapter, da, reason, wait_ms > 0 ? true : false);
> +		ret = _issue_deauth(padapter, da, reason, wait_ms > 0);
>  
>  		i++;

While this part of the patch is technically correct, I would argue it
doesn't improve the code. It would make the code more readable to pass
in the wait_ms value and then have the decision made based on that in
the called function.

Cheers,
Jes