linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] vsprintf: introduce %dE for error constants

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: <a5f535af-09f7-e65b-1527-7d6dd8553c1d@metux.net>
Date:   Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:29:08 +0200
From:   "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To:     Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] vsprintf: introduce %dE for error constants

On 25.08.19 01:37, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:

Hi,

> +static noinline_for_stack > +char *errstr(char *buf, char *end, unsigned long long num,> +	 
struct printf_spec spec)> +{
#1: why not putting that into some separate strerror() lib function ?
     This is something I've been looking for quite some time (actually
     already hacked it up somewhere, sometime, but forgotten ...)

#2: why not just having a big case statement and leave the actual lookup
     logic to the compiler ? IMHO, could be written in a very compact way
     by some macro magic

> +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(errorcodes); ++i) { > +		if (num == errorcodes[i].err || num == -errorcodes[i].err) {

why not taking the abs value only once, instead of duplicate comp on
each iteration ?


--mtx

-- 
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287