linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] isofs: One check less in isofs_read

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]

Date:   Mon, 21 Aug 2017 16:11:39 +0200
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] isofs: One check less in isofs_read_inode() after
 error detection

On Sat 19-08-17 09:18:42, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
> Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2017 08:10:40 +0200
> 
> * Adjust jump targets.
> 
> * Avoid a repeated check for the local variable "bh" after
>   a memory allocation failure in this function.
> 
> * Delete an initialisation for the local variable "ret"
>   which became unnecessary with this refactoring.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>

I agree that

fail:
        goto out;

in the original code is awkward and we can get rid of it. However renaming
labels is IMO pointless and

>  	if (bh)
> +release_bh:
>  		brelse(bh);
>  	return ret;

is just disgusting.

								Honza

-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR