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] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200416190158.GC26902@gate.crashing.org>
Date:   Thu, 16 Apr 2020 14:01:58 -0500
From:   Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@....fr>
Cc:     Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, npiggin@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc/uaccess: Implement unsafe_put_user() using 'asm goto'

On Thu, Apr 16, 2020 at 02:41:56PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> Le 16/04/2020 à 00:37, Segher Boessenkool a écrit :
> >>+	__put_user_nocheck_goto((__typeof__(*(ptr)))(x), (ptr), 
> >>sizeof(*(ptr)), label)
> >
> >This line gets too long, can you break it up somehow?
> 
> This line has 86 chars.

(And your mail program has wrapped it ;-) )

> powerpc arch tolerates lines with up to 90 chars, see 
> arch/powerpc/tools/checkpatch.sh

I *tolerate* it as well, sure, but long lines are bad for readability.
Like, I noticed it because it wrapped :-)

That "90" thing is just dumb, we should get rid of it.  Sometimes you
can have long lines, if that is better than the alternatives.  There
does not need to be a ridiculous "rule" that is unhappy *both* ways!

(This is true for many things in checkpatch, btw...  Rules of thumb,
not rules).


Segher

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ