netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] staging: qlge: Fix indentation issue under long for loop

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: <20220715092847.GU2316@kadam>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 12:28:47 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     binyi <dantengknight@...il.com>
Cc:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Manish Chopra <manishc@...vell.com>,
        GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com, Coiby Xu <coiby.xu@...il.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] staging: qlge: Fix indentation issue under long for
 loop

On Thu, Jul 14, 2022 at 11:04:57PM -0700, binyi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 07:14:55AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Tue, 2022-07-12 at 16:46 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > @@ -3007,10 +3007,12 @@ static int qlge_start_rx_ring(struct qlge_adapter *qdev, struct rx_ring *rx_ring
> > > >  		tmp = (u64)rx_ring->lbq.base_dma;
> > > >  		base_indirect_ptr = rx_ring->lbq.base_indirect;
> > > >  
> > > > -		for (page_entries = 0; page_entries <
> > > > -			MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN); page_entries++)
> > > > -				base_indirect_ptr[page_entries] =
> > > > -					cpu_to_le64(tmp + (page_entries * DB_PAGE_SIZE));
> > > > +		for (page_entries = 0;
> > > > +		     page_entries < MAX_DB_PAGES_PER_BQ(QLGE_BQ_LEN);
> > > > +		     page_entries++) {
> > > > +			base_indirect_ptr[page_entries] = cpu_to_le64(tmp);
> > > > +			tmp += DB_PAGE_SIZE;
> > > 
> > > I've previously said that using "int i;" is clearer here.  You would
> > > kind of expect "page_entries" to be the number of entries, so it's kind
> > > of misleading.  In other words, it's not just harmless wordiness and
> > > needless exposition, it's actively bad.
> > 
> > Likely true.
> > 
> 
> I agree it could be misleading. But if "page_entries" is in the for loop I
> would assume it's some kind of index variable, and still it provides some
> information (page entry) for the index, probably page_entry_idx could be
> better name but still makes the for loop a very long one. I guess I would
> leave it be.

It does not "provide some information".  That's what I was trying to
explain.  It's the opposite of information.  Information is good. No
information is neutral.  But anti-information is bad.

Like there are so many times in life where you listen to someone and you
think you are learning something but you end up stupider than before.
They have done studies on TV news where it can make you less informed
than people who don't watch it.  And other studies say if you stop
watching TV news for even a month then your brain starts to heal.

I don't really care about one line of code, but what I'm trying to say
is learn to recognize anti-information and delete it.  Comments for
example are often useless.

regards,
dan carpenter