linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ring_buffer: Change some static functions to bool

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]

Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 12:07:54 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
Cc:     Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>,
        <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] ring_buffer: Change some static functions to
 bool

On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 22:04:01 +0530
Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com> wrote:

> >   static __always_inline void
> > @@ -5408,9 +5407,8 @@ bool ring_buffer_empty(struct trace_buffer *buffer)
> >   {
> >   	struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
> >   	unsigned long flags;
> > -	bool dolock;
> > +	bool dolock, ret;
> >   	int cpu;
> > -	int ret;  
> 
> nit: would have been nice if you would not have changed existing stuff 
> i.e each variable on a separate line.

I agree. I prefer each variable on a separate line, as it makes fixing
"unused variable" warnings easier.

-- Steve


> 
> >   
> >   	/* yes this is racy, but if you don't like the race, lock the buffer */
> >   	for_each_buffer_cpu(buffer, cpu) {
> > @@ -5438,8 +5436,7 @@ bool ring_buffer_empty_cpu(struct trace_buffer *buffer, int cpu)
> >   {
> >   	struct ring_buffer_per_cpu *cpu_buffer;
> >   	unsigned long flags;
> > -	bool dolock;
> > -	int ret;
> > +	bool dolock, ret;  
> 
> same here