linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/8] staging: erofs: add error handling for xattr submodule

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: <99754359-647a-700f-95d1-421103735ed6@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Aug 2018 20:46:28 +0800
From:   Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@...wei.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
CC:     Chao Yu <chao@...nel.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>,
        <linux-erofs@...ts.ozlabs.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] staging: erofs: add error handling for xattr
 submodule

Hi Dan,

On 2018/8/13 20:40, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 08:17:27PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>>> @@ -294,8 +322,11 @@ static int inline_getxattr(struct inode *inode, struct getxattr_iter *it)
>>>>  		ret = xattr_foreach(&it->it, &find_xattr_handlers, &remaining);
>>>>  		if (ret >= 0)
>>>>  			break;
>>>> +
>>>> +		if (unlikely(ret != -ENOATTR))	/* -ENOMEM, -EIO, etc. */
>>> I have held off commenting on all the likely/unlikely annotations we
>>> are adding because I don't know what the fast paths are in this code.
>>> However, this is clearly an error path here, not on a fast path.
>>>
>>> Generally the rule on likely/unlikely is that they hurt readability so
>>> we should only add them if it makes a difference in benchmarking.
>>>
>> In my opinion, return values other than 0 and ENOATTR(ENODATA) rarely happens,
>> it should be in the slow path...
>>
> What I'm trying to say is please stop adding so many likely/unlikely
> annotations.  You should only add them if you have the benchmark data to
> show the it really is required.
> 
> 
OK, I'll follow your suggestion.

I could say it is my personal code tendency(style).
If you don't like it/think them useless, I will remove them all. 

Thanks for your suggestion.

Thanks,
Gao Xiang

> regards,
> dan carpenter
>