linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm/damon/sysfs: change few functions execute order

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: <20220908221653.131120-1-sj@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu,  8 Sep 2022 22:16:53 +0000
From:   SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>, Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        damon@...ts.linux.dev, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/damon/sysfs: change few functions execute order

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 15:10:42 -0700 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu,  8 Sep 2022 18:49:47 +0000 SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Xin,
> > 
> > On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 16:19:32 +0800 Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > These nr_{schemes,regions,contexts,kdamonds}_store() functions are both call
> > 
> > checkpatch complains as below:
> > 
> >     WARNING: Possible unwrapped commit description (prefer a maximum 75 chars per line)
> >     #10:
> >     These nr_{schemes,regions,contexts,kdamonds}_store() functions are both call
> 
> I fix that sort of thing.  A lot ;)

Appreciate your efforts always.  If you need any help from my side, please let
me know at any time.

> 
> > > kstrtoint() to get relative values from sysfs interface, if it return an
> > > error, there get kobject instance would be meaningless through 'container_of'.
> > 
> > I was thinking the compiler could do that kind of optimization on its own, so I
> > preferred to make the code shorter.
> 
> Yes, the compiler will do this.
> 
> > This change makes the code slightly longer, while the benefit of the change is
> > unclear.  I'd like to keep it as is unless we get some clear benefit of this?
> 
> I find it a readability improvement.  Puts the initialization in a more
> appropriate place and avoids those nasty tricks to prevent unreasonable
> line lengths.

Agreed.

Reviewed-by: SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>


Thanks,
SJ