netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] forcedeth: Delete a redundant condition branch

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: <20f15fbc-347f-b76d-24f4-da08f76fd603@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 May 2021 09:43:56 +0800
From:   "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     Rain River <rain.1986.08.12@...il.com>,
        Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] forcedeth: Delete a redundant condition branch

On 2021/5/11 3:59, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 09:56:56PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote:
>> The statement of the last "if (adv_lpa & LPA_10HALF)" branch is the same
>> as the "else" branch. Delete it to simplify code.
>>
>> No functional change.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
> 
> Hi Zhen
> 
> Could you teach your bot to check lore.kernel.org and see if the same
> patch has been submitted before? If it has, there is probably a reason
> why it was rejected. You need to check if that reason it still true.

This is a tool that comes with the kernel. Now it's all about manual
Google searches to see if someone has posted it. So there could be a
mistake.

Although the compiler can optimize this "if" branch, but I think those
that can optimize directly should try to avoid relying on the machine.
If it must exist, it should be in the form of comments. Otherwise, the
intuition is that there was a mistake in writing this code. That's why
the kernel tool reports it. At least the developers of the tool has the
same point of view as mine.

> 
>     Andrew
> 
> .
>