netdev - Re: can: Use common error handling code in vxcan

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 28 Oct 2017 21:54:00 +0200
From:   Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: can: Use common error handling code in vxcan_newlink()

On 10/28/2017 09:18 PM, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> If you want to change the semantic of the result check
> 
> I am curious if another source code reduction (by the deletion of “ < 0”)
> will become acceptable at similar places.
> 

Source code reduction is not the main target.
If you can simplify code without changing the wanted semantic you made 
an improvement.

> 
>> - this has to done consistently at all rtnl_configure_link() caller sites.
> 
> Are there any more functions to consider?

Of course there are more callers of rtnl_configure_link() ...

>> And not only in vxcan.c
> 
> Are you interested in related adjustments for a bigger code base?

No. Definitely not.

If you aim for the the deletion of “ < 0” for all rtnl_configure_link() 
users you would need to do this consistently.

If you think you would like to do that. Feel free to do it.

Regards,
Oliver