linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body as a ptr

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yh5ZzNQQQE8rIexy@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 1 Mar 2022 18:37:16 +0100
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Arnd Bergman <arnd@...db.de>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>,
        Brian Johannesmeyer <bjohannesmeyer@...il.com>,
        Cristiano Giuffrida <c.giuffrida@...nl>,
        "Bos, H.J." <h.j.bos@...nl>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
        drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
        dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        amd-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
        intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, samba-technical@...ts.samba.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] treewide: remove using list iterator after loop body
 as a ptr

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 01:06:57PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 28. Feb 2022, at 12:20, Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:08:18PM +0100, Jakob Koschel wrote:
> >> If the list does not contain the expected element, the value of
> >> list_for_each_entry() iterator will not point to a valid structure.
> >> To avoid type confusion in such case, the list iterator
> >> scope will be limited to list_for_each_entry() loop.
> >> 
> >> In preparation to limiting scope of a list iterator to the list traversal
> >> loop, use a dedicated pointer to point to the found element.
> >> Determining if an element was found is then simply checking if
> >> the pointer is != NULL.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Jakob Koschel <jakobkoschel@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/sgx/encl.c       |  6 +++--
> >> drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_sas.c    | 17 ++++++++-----
> >> drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c       | 38 ++++++++++++++++++----------
> >> drivers/usb/gadget/configfs.c        | 22 ++++++++++------
> >> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/max3420_udc.c | 11 +++++---
> >> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/tegra-xudc.c  | 11 +++++---
> >> drivers/usb/mtu3/mtu3_gadget.c       | 11 +++++---
> >> drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c       | 11 +++++---
> >> drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c        | 11 +++++---
> >> 9 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
> > 
> > The drivers/usb/ portion of this patch should be in patch 1/X, right?
> 
> I kept them separate since it's a slightly different case.
> Using 'ptr' instead of '&ptr->other_member'. Regardless, I'll split
> this commit up as you mentioned.
> 
> > 
> > Also, you will have to split these up per-subsystem so that the
> > different subsystem maintainers can take these in their trees.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> To clarify I understand you correctly:
> I should do one patch set per-subsystem with every instance/(file?)
> fixed as a separate commit?

Yes, each file needs a different commit as they are usually all written
or maintained by different people.

As I said in my other response, if you need any help with this, just let
me know, I'm glad to help.

thanks,

greg k-h