linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/7] iio: light: tsl2583: change functions to only have a single exit point

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: <20161019110859.GG4469@mwanda>
Date:   Wed, 19 Oct 2016 14:08:59 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Brian Masney <masneyb@...tation.org>
Cc:     jic23@...nel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, lars@...afoo.de,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, pmeerw@...erw.net, knaack.h@....de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] iio: light: tsl2583: change functions to only have a
 single exit point

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 06:32:05AM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> Change the following functions to only have a single exit point:
> taos_i2c_read(), taos_als_calibrate(), taos_chip_on(),
> taos_gain_store(), taos_gain_available_show(), taos_luxtable_store()
> and taos_probe().
> 

What's the point of this?  This style of code just makes things more
complicated and leads to "forgot the error code" bugs.  People think
that it future proofs the code in case we add locking but I have looked
into this and it has minimal if any impact at preventing locking bugs.

regards,
dan carpenter