linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rv: Convert to use lock guard

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251126104210.5696dbe9@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 10:42:10 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com>
Cc: Nam Cao <namcao@...utronix.de>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Mathieu Desnoyers  <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] rv: Convert to use lock guard

On Wed, 26 Nov 2025 10:33:51 +0100
Gabriele Monaco <gmonaco@...hat.com> wrote:

> > > No biggy, but I wonder if this would look better as:
> > > 
> > > 		return retval ? : count;  
> > 
> > Unless you really prefer it this way, I would rather not. The first time
> > I saw this syntax, it confused the hell out of me. Took me some time
> > scratching my head until I figured out that it is a GNU extension.
> > 
> > I prefer to stay with the C standard unless there is major benefit not
> > to.  
> 
> To be fair, I find it a bit obscure as well, although it's frequently used
> within the kernel.
> 
> Let's not change it then.

As I said, "No biggy". I personally like that notation better. But that's
my own personal choice. I won't push that on other ;-)

-- Steve