netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: netrom: refactor code in nr_add

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: <59EA2A2D.4040003@bfs.de>
Date:   Fri, 20 Oct 2017 18:54:05 +0200
From:   walter harms <wharms@....de>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
CC:     Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-hams@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] net: netrom: refactor code in nr_add_node



Am 20.10.2017 18:06, schrieb Gustavo A. R. Silva:
> Hi Walter,
> 
> Quoting walter harms <wharms@....de>:
> 
>> Am 19.10.2017 19:27, schrieb Gustavo A. R. Silva:
>>> Code refactoring in order to make the code easier to read and maintain.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
>>> ---
>>> This code was tested by compilation only (GCC 7.2.0 was used).
>>>
>>>  net/netrom/nr_route.c | 63
>>> ++++++++++++++++-----------------------------------
>>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/netrom/nr_route.c b/net/netrom/nr_route.c
>>> index fc9cadc..1e5165f 100644
>>> --- a/net/netrom/nr_route.c
>>> +++ b/net/netrom/nr_route.c
>>> @@ -80,6 +80,23 @@ static struct nr_neigh
>>> *nr_neigh_get_dev(ax25_address *callsign,
>>>
>>>  static void nr_remove_neigh(struct nr_neigh *);
>>>
>>> +/*      re-sort the routes in quality order.    */
>>> +static inline void re_sort_routes(struct nr_node *nr_node, int ix_x,
>>> int ix_y)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct nr_route nr_route;
>>> +
>>> +    if (nr_node->routes[ix_y].quality >
>>> nr_node->routes[ix_x].quality) {
>>> +        if (nr_node->which == ix_x)
>>> +            nr_node->which = ix_y;
>>> +        else if (nr_node->which == ix_y)
>>> +            nr_node->which = ix_x;
>>> +
>>> +        nr_route              = nr_node->routes[ix_x];
>>> +        nr_node->routes[ix_x] = nr_node->routes[ix_y];
>>> +        nr_node->routes[ix_y] = nr_route;
>>> +    }
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>>
>> Good idea, a bit of nit picking ..
>> does ix_ has a special meaning ? otherwise x,y would be sufficient.
> 
> ix typical stands for index, but I think just x and y are fine too.
> 
>> From the code below i can see: y=x+1 Perhaps that can be used.
>>
> 
> So are you proposing to use two arguments instead of three?
> 
> re_sort_routes(nr_node, 0);
> 

I am not sure, i would wait a bit and see if what improves readability.
as Kevin Dawson pointed out: this is a sort here.
Maybe there a nice way to do something like that (i do not know):

case 3:
  re_sort_routes(nr_node, 1,2)
case 2:
  re_sort_routes(nr_node, 0,1)
case 1:
  break;

The question is: Is the sorted list needed or simply the maximum ?

NTL is a good thing to chop down the function in smaller digestible
peaces.

re,
 wh 	

> 
>> kernel.h has a swap() macro. so you can
>> swap(nr_node->routes[x],nr_node->routes[y]);
>>
> 
> Nice, I will use that macro.
> 
>> hope that helps,
> 
> Definitely. I appreciate your comments.
> 




> Thanks!
> -- 
> Gustavo A. R. Silva
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>