linux-kernel - [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: firewire-tascam: Use do { } while for loops executed at least once

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: <1494836350-28790-2-git-send-email-geert@linux-m68k.org>
Date:   Mon, 15 May 2017 10:19:10 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@...amocchi.jp>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] ALSA: firewire-tascam: Use do { } while for loops executed at least once

If a loop is intended to be executed at least once, it is better to use
"do { ... } while (...)" instead of "while (...) { ... }".
The former is easier to understand for the casual reviewer, and doesn't
require preinitializing the canary variable.

Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
---
Compile-tested only.
---
 sound/firewire/tascam/tascam-stream.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/firewire/tascam/tascam-stream.c b/sound/firewire/tascam/tascam-stream.c
index e433b92ac6904db5..4ea6845aae87fdef 100644
--- a/sound/firewire/tascam/tascam-stream.c
+++ b/sound/firewire/tascam/tascam-stream.c
@@ -80,17 +80,17 @@ static int set_clock(struct snd_tscm *tscm, unsigned int rate,
 
 int snd_tscm_stream_get_rate(struct snd_tscm *tscm, unsigned int *rate)
 {
-	u32 data = 0x0;
 	unsigned int trials = 0;
+	u32 data;
 	int err;
 
-	while (data == 0x0 && trials++ < 5) {
+	do {
 		err = get_clock(tscm, &data);
 		if (err < 0)
 			return err;
 
 		data = (data & 0xff000000) >> 24;
-	}
+	} while (data == 0x0 && ++trials < 5);
 
 	/* Check base rate. */
 	if ((data & 0x0f) == 0x01)
-- 
2.7.4