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: <17e51208-18b9-56d8-e8e3-2e40d6e94438@cogentembedded.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Sep 2021 18:40:13 +0300
From:   Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: most: dim2: force fcnt=3 on Renesas GEN3

>> +	dev_fcnt = pdata && pdata->fcnt ? pdata->fcnt : fcnt;
> 
> Please use a real if () statement here and do not bury real logic in a
> crazy line like this one, as that is all but impossible to maintain over
> time.

The same source file already uses the same form of conditional expressions several lines above:

 > ret = pdata && pdata->enable ? pdata->enable(pdev) : 0;

 > dev->disable_platform = pdata ? pdata->disable : NULL;

Shall I use real if statement for my expression while keeping those as-is? This looks ... strange.
Or shall I convert all conditional expressions to if statements?

Nikita

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ