Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1561911

Re: alpha: Checking source code positions for the setting of error codes

From SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: alpha: Checking source code positions for the setting of error codes
Date 2017-01-18 17:00 +0100
Message-ID <t10Oy-5VY-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <t0WUy-3AT-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <t0X4d-3E5-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t0ZfI-594-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


>> A local variable was set to an error code in two cases before a concrete
>> error situation was detected. Thus move the corresponding assignment into
>> an if branch to indicate a software failure there.
>>
>> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
> 
> Why the hell is that an issue?

* Can misplaced variable assignments result in unwanted run time consequences
  because of the previous approach for a control flow specification?

* How do you think about to achieve that error codes will only be set
  after a specific software failure was detected?


> It's a common enough idiom,

Are corresponding implementation details worth for another look?


> and while these functions are far from being hot paths,
> blind patches like that are very much to be discouraged.  NAK.

Thanks for your feedback.

Regards,
Markus

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

[PATCH 0/4] alpha: Fine-tuning for five function implementations SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 12:50 +0100
  [PATCH 4/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "res" in  srm_env_proc_write() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 13:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 4/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "res"  in srm_env_proc_write() Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de> - 2017-01-18 14:40 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 4/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "res" in  srm_env_proc_write() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 15:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 4/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "res"  in srm_env_proc_write() Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2017-01-18 15:20 +0100
      Re: alpha: Checking source code positions for the setting of error  codes SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 17:00 +0100
        Re: alpha: Checking source code positions for the setting of error  codes Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> - 2017-01-18 18:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 4/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "res"  in srm_env_proc_write() kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com> - 2017-01-19 01:50 +0100
  [PATCH 3/4] alpha: Return directly after a failed copy_from_user() or  getname() in two functions SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 13:00 +0100
  [PATCH 2/4] alpha: Move two assignments for the variable "error" in  osf_utsname() SF Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> - 2017-01-18 13:00 +0100

csiph-web