Re: [PATCH] fs/eventpoll: error handling micro-cleanup

[Jeff Garzik]

Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>
> > Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > > On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > >
> > > > While reviewing the 'may be used uninitialized' bogus gcc warnings,
> > > > I noticed that an error code assignment was only needed if an error had
> > > > actually occured.
> > > But that saved one line of code, and there are countless occurences in the
> > > kernel of such code pattern ;)
> > I'm not sure there are countless occurrences with PTR_ERR().  The line is
> > incorrect (but harmless) if inode is a valid pointer...
>
> I just tried a `find /usr/src/linux-2.6.16/ -type f -exec grep -H -C 2 PTR_ERR {} \;`
> and looked at the cases where the error variable is assigned in any case 
> before the test. Same code pattern as, like:
>
> error = -EFAULT;
> if (copy_from_user(...))
> 	goto kaboom;

No, that's quite different.  I'm talking about

	ptr = get_a_pointer_from_somewhere()
	error = PTR_ERR(ptr)

See the difference?  The error variable is directly assigned from a 
potentially-valid pointer.  Doing that is quite error prone, whereas
	error = -EFOO
is not.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/