netdev - Re: [PATCH][next] tipc: remove redundant assignment to ret, simplify code

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: <a9c41116-98b6-461b-b936-37995a343a51@moroto.mountain>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:27:13 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Tung Quang Nguyen <tung.q.nguyen@...tech.com.au>
Cc: "Colin King (gmail)" <colin.i.king@...il.com>,
	Jon Maloy <jmaloy@...hat.com>, Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net" <tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	"kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] tipc: remove redundant assignment to ret, simplify
 code

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:04:15AM +0000, Tung Quang Nguyen wrote:
> >Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] tipc: remove redundant assignment to ret, simplify code
> >
> >On 11/04/2024 11:31, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:04:10AM +0000, Tung Quang Nguyen wrote:
> >>>>
> >>> I suggest that err variable should be completely removed. Could you
> >>> please also do the same thing for this code ?
> >>> "
> >>> ...
> >>> err = skb_handler(skb, cb, tsk);
> >>> if (err) {
> >>
> >> If we write the code as:
> >>
> >> 	if (some_function(parameters)) {
> >>
> >> then at first that looks like a boolean.  People probably think the
> >> function returns true/false.  But if we leave it as-is:
> >>
> >> 	err = some_function(parameters);
> >> 	if (err) {
> >>
> >> Then that looks like error handling.
> >>
> >> So it's better and more readable to leave it as-is.
> >>
> >> regards,
> >> dan carpenter
> >
> >I concur with Dan's comments.
> >
> >Colin
> I have a different view.
> It does not make sense to me to use stack variable 'err' just for
> checking return code of the functions (__tipc_nl_add_sk/
> __tipc_add_sock_diag) that we know always return true on error.
>

I think you are trying to mirco optimize the code at the expense
of readability.  It is unnecessary.  The compiler is smart enough to
generate the same code either way.  I have just tested this on my system
and it is true.

$ md5sum net/tipc/socket.o.*
f5ebea97eeb9736c5b8097158c2b12e5  net/tipc/socket.o.without_var
f5ebea97eeb9736c5b8097158c2b12e5  net/tipc/socket.o.with_var
$

When you're doing these tests, you need to ensure that the line numbers
do change so I have commented out the old lines instead of deleting
them.

regards,
dan carpenter

diff --git a/net/tipc/socket.c b/net/tipc/socket.c
index 7e4135db5816..879a8a9786b0 100644
--- a/net/tipc/socket.c
+++ b/net/tipc/socket.c
@@ -3560,24 +3560,21 @@ int tipc_nl_sk_walk(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb,
 {
 	struct rhashtable_iter *iter = (void *)cb->args[4];
 	struct tipc_sock *tsk;
-	int err;
+//	int err;
 
 	rhashtable_walk_start(iter);
 	while ((tsk = rhashtable_walk_next(iter)) != NULL) {
 		if (IS_ERR(tsk)) {
-			err = PTR_ERR(tsk);
-			if (err == -EAGAIN) {
-				err = 0;
+			if (PTR_ERR(tsk) == -EAGAIN)
 				continue;
-			}
 			break;
 		}
 
 		sock_hold(&tsk->sk);
 		rhashtable_walk_stop(iter);
 		lock_sock(&tsk->sk);
-		err = skb_handler(skb, cb, tsk);
-		if (err) {
+//		err = skb_handler(skb, cb, tsk);
+		if (skb_handler(skb, cb, tsk)) {
 			release_sock(&tsk->sk);
 			sock_put(&tsk->sk);
 			goto out;