linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] mm: Section numbers use the type "unsigned long"

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: <20190617185757.b57402b465caff0cf6f85320@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 17 Jun 2019 18:57:57 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Arun KS <arunks@...eaurora.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] mm: Section numbers use the type "unsigned long"

On Sat, 15 Jun 2019 10:06:54 +0200 Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr> wrote:

> 
> 
> Le 14/06/2019 à 21:00, Andrew Morton a écrit :
> > On Fri, 14 Jun 2019 12:01:09 +0200 David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> We are using a mixture of "int" and "unsigned long". Let's make this
> >> consistent by using "unsigned long" everywhere. We'll do the same with
> >> memory block ids next.
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> -	int i, ret, section_count = 0;
> >> +	unsigned long i;
> >>
> >> ...
> >>
> >> -	unsigned int i;
> >> +	unsigned long i;
> > 
> > Maybe I did too much fortran back in the day, but I think the
> > expectation is that a variable called "i" has type "int".
> > 
> > This?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > s/unsigned long i/unsigned long section_nr/
> 
>  From my point of view you degrade readability by doing that.
> 
> section_nr_to_pfn(mem->start_section_nr + section_nr);
> 
> Three times the word 'section_nr' in one line, is that worth it ? Gives 
> me headache.
> 
> Codying style says the following, which makes full sense in my opinion:
> 
> LOCAL variable names should be short, and to the point.  If you have
> some random integer loop counter, it should probably be called ``i``.
> Calling it ``loop_counter`` is non-productive, if there is no chance of it
> being mis-understood.

Well.  It did say "integer".  Calling an unsigned long `i' is flat out
misleading.

> What about just naming it 'nr' if we want to use something else than 'i' ?

Sure, that works.