linux-kernel - Re: selinux: Move some assignments for the variable "rc" in policydb

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: <CAHC9VhSCq=Qqwh7z5mAhMNA6ELUa8nvNoX2cuXtuSJGCf1gThA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 25 Mar 2017 11:38:11 -0400
From:   Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, selinux@...ho.nsa.gov,
        Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>,
        James Morris <james.l.morris@...cle.com>,
        "Serge E. Hallyn" <serge@...lyn.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        William Roberts <william.c.roberts@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: selinux: Move some assignments for the variable "rc" in policydb_read()

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 6:09 AM, SF Markus Elfring
<elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>> One local variable was set to an error code in some cases before
>>> a concrete error situation was detected. Thus move the corresponding
>>> assignments into if branches to indicate a software failure there.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
>>> ---
>>>  security/selinux/ss/policydb.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>>  1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>
>> More code churn with no real advantage.
>
> There are different opinions about the mentioned implementation details.
>
>> I agree with the style you are using,
>
> Thanks for such feedback.
>
>> and would support changing it if you are in the function fixing bugs
>> or doing other substantial changes in that code,
>
> Is this expectation a contradiction for a desired patch granularity?
>
>> but I can't justify it as a standalone change, sorry.
>
> This update suggestion seems to be not attractive enough for you at the moment
> as another change step of my patch series.
> Would you like to check if there are other effects worthwhile besides the proposed
> coding style adjustment here?

To be honest, I would just leave it alone for now.  If you want to
contribute, focus on meaningful improvements such as bug fixing and/or
new features; changing only the code style isn't very interesting or
appealing, even if I happen to agree with your changes.

-- 
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com