linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/tpm2: Change exception handling to be Python 3 compatible

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: <20200413180440.GA10917@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Apr 2020 21:04:52 +0300
From:   Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Ezra Buehler <ezra@...yb.ch>
Cc:     Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org,
        Tadeusz Struk <tadeusz.struk@...el.com>,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/tpm2: Change exception handling to be Python 3
 compatible

On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 07:02:20AM +0200, Ezra Buehler wrote:
> Hi Jarkko,
> 
> On 12 Apr 2020, at 19:07, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 05:02:27PM +0200, Ezra Buehler wrote:
> >> Hi Jarkkon,
> >> 
> >>> On 12 Apr 2020, at 16:36, Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>> +        except ProtocolError(e):
> >> 
> >> Should this not be
> >> 
> >>        except ProtocolError as e:
> > 
> > Unless there is a functional difference, does it matter?
> > 
> > /Jarkko
> 
> Well, your patch confuses me a lot. It looks to me like you are passing
> the undefined `e` variable to the constructor.
> 
> When I run flake8 on it I get following error (among others):
> 
>     F821 undefined name 'e'

I don't know what flake8 is.

> What I suggested is the standard syntax:
> https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/errors.html

It passed the Python 3 interpreter.

> Did you test this? You should get an error as soon as an exception
> occurs.

Yes. Interpreter did not complain. I did not know that the language
is broken that way that you have to exercise the code path to get
a syntax error.

/Jarkko