netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] net-PPP: Deletion of a few unnecessary checks

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: <54958B8C.7010105@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:	Sat, 20 Dec 2014 15:45:32 +0100
From:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, linux-ppp@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/6] net-PPP: Deletion of a few unnecessary checks

> I'm saying to leave the code alone.

Do I need to try another interpretation out for your feedback?


> If it goes:
> 
> 	var = foo_that_returns_ptr_err()
> 	if (IS_ERR(var))
> 		return PTR_ERR(var);
> 
> 	p->bar = var;
> 
> or whatever, simply keep it that way!

Do you want to express here that a data structure member should
only be set after a previous function call succeeded?



> I'm not engaging in this conversation any further, you have
> already consumed way too much of my limited time on this
> incredibly trivial matter.

I hope that you will find a bit time and patience again
to clarify affected implementation details in a safer and
unambiguous way.

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html