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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:00:15 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> To: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] blk-throttle: Move three assignments for the variable "ret" in tg_set_max() >> @@ -1327,27 +1327,30 @@ static ssize_t tg_set_max(struct kernfs_open_file *of, >> break; >> ctx.body += len; >> >> - ret = -EINVAL; >> p = tok; >> strsep(&p, "="); >> - if (!p || (sscanf(p, "%llu", &val) != 1 && strcmp(p, "max"))) >> + if (!p || (sscanf(p, "%llu", &val) != 1 && strcmp(p, "max"))) { >> + ret = -EINVAL; >> goto out_finish; >> + } > > Sorry, I don't like this patch. We know the next error if we encounter one > will be EINVAL until we change it. Thanks for your constructive feedback. > Your patch doesn't introduce a functual change and doesn't improve readability, > so I don't really see a point for it. We have got different preferences for the placement of error code settings. Do you care about run time changes there? Regards, Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists