linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] wimax/i2400m: remove unlikely() from WARN*() condition

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: <4a064df8-9b44-8380-d7c5-8a94086c3a52@linux.com>
Date:   Sat, 31 Aug 2019 18:59:53 +0300
From:   Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, linux-wimax@...el.com
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Inaky Perez-Gonzalez <inaky.perez-gonzalez@...el.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/11] wimax/i2400m: remove unlikely() from WARN*()
 condition



On 31.08.2019 14:25, Markus Elfring wrote:
>>          pad_buf = i2400m_tx_fifo_push(i2400m, padding, 0, 0);
>> -        if (unlikely(WARN_ON(pad_buf == NULL
>> -                     || pad_buf == TAIL_FULL))) {
>> +        if (WARN_ON(pad_buf == NULL || pad_buf == TAIL_FULL)) {
> 
> How do you think about to use the following code variant?
> 
> +        if (WARN_ON(!pad_buf || pad_buf == TAIL_FULL)) {
> 

Well, I thought about it, because coccinelle warns about style here.
But this condition looks more symmetric with direct comparison.
I've decided that it will be better to save the original style.

Thanks,
Denis