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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170828182723.iav5lgucnuhd646f@pd.tnic>
Date:   Mon, 28 Aug 2017 20:27:23 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tyler Baicar <tbaicar@...eaurora.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        james.morse@....com, shiju.jose@...wei.com,
        Geliang Tang <geliangtang@...il.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] acpi: apei: clear error status before acknowledging
 the error

On Mon, Aug 28, 2017 at 08:44:21PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> For my opinion, since you asked, the either case needs a comment on
> top of that additional check.

That's because the comment belongs to the v2 part of the check.

> Separate conditionals in independent cases are, of course, better.

Yes, and separate are easier to read if you read them like this:

+       if (rc == -ENOENT)
+               return rc;

<--- Ok, we got the missing entry out of the way, now, here, we have a
valid entry. Now we can concentrate on processing it further.

	... other check and ack and ...

And this becomes a lot more natural when you're staring at a big function
which does a lot of things and you concentrate only on the main path.

Oh, and this is how those checks get translated to asm as there you
don't really have compound if-statements. So if you switch your mind to
reading such checks separately, you're practically ready to read their
asm translation too...

Anyway, this is how I see it.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
-- 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ