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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:02:07 +0800 From: Yuyang Du <duyuyang@...il.com> To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> Cc: peterz@...radead.org, will.deacon@....com, mingo@...nel.org, ming.lei@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 19/19] locking/lockdep: Change if to else-if when checking bfs errors Thanks for the review. On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 00:29, Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> wrote: > > On Mon, 2019-03-18 at 16:57 +0800, Yuyang Du wrote: > > - if (ret < 0) { > > + if (unlikely(ret < 0)) { > > print_bfs_bug(ret); > > return 0; > > } > > - if (ret == 1) > > + else if (ret == 1) > > return ret; > > Have you verified this patch series with checkpatch? Checkpatch should have > reported that you are changing code that conforms to the coding style into > code that does not conform to the kernel coding style. Checkpatch should have > reported the following: > > "else is not generally useful after a break or return" I didn't. And, these changes were done in a row; my not checking each of them was careless. Thanks, Yuyang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists