[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191004190713.hdfv5h3dppwmz6bs@yavin.dot.cyphar.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 05:07:13 +1000
From: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@...har.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] usercopy structs for v5.4-rc2
On 2019-10-04, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 3:42 AM Christian Brauner
> <christian.brauner@...ntu.com> wrote:
> >
> > The only separate fix we we had to apply
> > was for a warning by clang when building the tests for using the result of
> > an assignment as a condition without parantheses.
>
> Hmm. That code is ugly, both before and after the fix.
>
> This just doesn't make sense for so many reasons:
>
> if ((ret |= test(umem_src == NULL, "kmalloc failed")))
>
> where the insanity comes from
>
> - why "|=" when you know that "ret" was zero before (and it had to
> be, for the test to make sense)
>
> - why do this as a single line anyway?
>
> - don't do the stupid "double parenthesis" to hide a warning. Make it
> use an actual comparison if you add a layer of parentheses.
You're quite right -- I was mindlessly copying the "ret |=" logic the
rest of test_user_copy.c does without thinking about it. I'll include a
cleanup for it in the openat2(2) series.
--
Aleksa Sarai
Senior Software Engineer (Containers)
SUSE Linux GmbH
<https://www.cyphar.com/>
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists