linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] pmem: refactor pmem_clear

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: <839591ec-1754-e5a2-4676-57772bbaf3d0@oracle.com>
Date:   Wed, 6 Apr 2022 17:34:23 +0000
From:   Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
CC:     "david@...morbit.com" <david@...morbit.com>,
        "djwong@...nel.org" <djwong@...nel.org>,
        "dan.j.williams@...el.com" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        "vishal.l.verma@...el.com" <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "dave.jiang@...el.com" <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
        "agk@...hat.com" <agk@...hat.com>,
        "snitzer@...hat.com" <snitzer@...hat.com>,
        "dm-devel@...hat.com" <dm-devel@...hat.com>,
        "ira.weiny@...el.com" <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        "willy@...radead.org" <willy@...radead.org>,
        "vgoyal@...hat.com" <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
        "linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev" <nvdimm@...ts.linux.dev>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] pmem: refactor pmem_clear_poison()

On 4/5/2022 10:04 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 01:47:46PM -0600, Jane Chu wrote:
>> +	pmem_clear_bb(pmem, to_sect(pmem, offset), cleared >> SECTOR_SHIFT);
>> +	return (cleared < len) ? BLK_STS_IOERR : BLK_STS_OK;
> 
> No need for the braces.  That being said perosnally I find a simple:
> 
> 	if (cleared < len)
> 		return BLK_STS_IOERR;
> 	return BLK_STS_OK;
> 
> much easier to read anyway.

will do.

> 
> Otherwise looks good:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>

Thanks!
-jane