linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/6] rhashtable: improve documentation for rhashtable_walk

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: <CAHpGcMJgys_gMOw-VEpbO6w+NFaww-P6OvL=jwZfie9TxD9ZYA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Mar 2018 00:46:46 +0200
From:   Andreas Grünbacher <andreas.gruenbacher@...il.com>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
Cc:     Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bob Peterson <rpeterso@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] rhashtable: improve documentation for rhashtable_walk_peek()

Neil,

2018-03-27 1:33 GMT+02:00 NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>:
> The documentation for rhashtable_walk_peek() wrong.  It claims to
> return the *next* entry, whereas it in fact returns the *previous*
> entry.
> However if no entries have yet been returned - or if the iterator
> was reset due to a resize event, then rhashtable_walk_peek()
> *does* return the next entry, but also advances the iterator.
>
> I suspect that this interface should be discarded and the one user
> should be changed to not require it.  Possibly this patch should be
> seen as a first step in that conversation.
>
> This patch mostly corrects the documentation, but does make a
> small code change so that the documentation can be correct without
> listing too many special cases.  I don't think the one user will
> be affected by the code change.

how about I come up with a replacement so that we can remove
rhashtable_walk_peek straight away without making it differently
broken in the meantime?

Thanks,
Andreas