linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm64: Don't call NULL in do_compat_alignment

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: <D8V6FN8TF5IK.DV6F5X5L61V@igalia.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 10:58:48 +0200
From: "Angelos Oikonomopoulos" <angelos@...lia.com>
To: "Anshuman Khandual" <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Cc: <catalin.marinas@....com>, <will@...nel.org>,
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-dev@...lia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Don't call NULL in do_compat_alignment_fixup

On Tue Apr 1, 2025 at 10:22 AM CEST, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> Makes sense. A small nit - just wondering if the following restructuring
> here would make things bit more readable ? Regardless, your decision.
>
> 	if (handler)
>         	type = handler(addr, instr, regs);
>         else
>                 return 1;

I went with the original formulation since -- to my mind at least -- an
"early exit" idiom feels more appropriate for something we found we
can't handle. Could work either way though.

Thanks,
Angelos