linux-kernel - Re: drm/i915/gvt: Use common error handling code in shadow_workload_ring

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]

Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2017 16:40:10 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        intel-gvt-dev@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc:     Garry Hurley <garry.hurley.jr@...il.com>,
        Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
        Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
        Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@...el.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: drm/i915/gvt: Use common error handling code in
 shadow_workload_ring_buffer()

> This isn't the case here.

I find your view interesting for further clarification somehow.


> Instead of making the code more readable, we're making it more convoluted.

Can the shown software refactoring usually help here?


> It's just that two out of three error messages happened to be the same

This is true.


> and Markus wants to save a bit of memory by using the same string.

And also the same executable code (besides an identical error message).


> The memory savings is not so big that it's worth making the code less readable.

How does such a feedback fit to information for the deletion of questionable
messages at other source code places?

Regards,
Markus