linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sched: core: Remove unnecessary ‘NULL’ values from core

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: <1b4714f8-eb5c-40c6-aa3f-eb6eb7be209e@web.de>
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 10:03:53 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Li zeming <zeming@...china.com>, Ben Segall <bsegall@...gle.com>,
 Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
 Dietmar Eggemann <dietmar.eggemann@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
 Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>,
 Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: core: Remove unnecessary ‘NULL’ values from core_rq

> core_rq is assigned first, so it does not need to initialize the
> assignment.

* Would a wording approach (like the following) be a bit nicer?

  The variable “core_rq” will eventually be set to an appropriate pointer
  a bit later. Thus omit the explicit initialisation at the beginning.

* How do you think about to use the summary phrase
  “Delete an unnecessary initialisation in sched_core_cpu_deactivate()”?


Regards,
Markus