netdev - Re: [PATCH] dl2k: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in receive

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 16:18:02 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Rand Deeb <rand.sec96@...il.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, deeb.rand@...fident.ru,
 lvc-project@...uxtesting.org, voskresenski.stanislav@...fident.ru
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dl2k: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in
 receive_packet()

On Fri, 16 Feb 2024 02:32:54 +0300 Rand Deeb wrote:
> Regarding your comment on using `(!skb)` instead of `(skb == NULL)`, I
> understand that `(!skb)` is more common and is also recommended by `
> checkpatch.pl`. However, I chose to keep the original code style and logic
> to maintain consistency and avoid confusion, especially for other
> developers who might be familiar with the existing format. The same
> applies to the `printk` statement. In the same function, there is an exact
> block of code used; should I fix it too?

Don't worry about surrounding code if it's written in a clearly
outdated style.

If the style is different intentionally, that's different, but
for old code using more modern style helps bring the code base
forward little by little.