Em Tue, Aug 29, 2000 at 10:31:22PM +0100, Philipp Rumpf escreveu:
> On Sun, Aug 27, 2000 at 10:28:14PM +0200, Kenneth Johansson wrote:
> > Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >
> > > #include <linux/config.h>
> > > @@ -510,10 +511,7 @@
> > > if (put_user(len, optlen))
> > > return -EFAULT;
> > >
> > > - if (copy_to_user(optval, &val, len))
> > > - return -EFAULT;
> > > -
> > > - return 0;
> > > + return copy_to_user(optval, &val, len) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> > > }
> >
> > What is this are you trying to compress the source code ?
> > I like the old way better. I think it is faster to read and understand.
>
> Same here. Linus, I didn't actually interpret your mail on the subject as
> proposing changes like the one above. Care to enlighten this a bit ?
I understood it as: don't use copy.*user_ret, use it as:
return copy_to_user(...) ? -EFAULT : 0;
which doesn't mean that we should send patches _just_ to make it use ?:, but in
the process of doing other needed cleanups (s/suser/capable/, checking put_user
return, getting rid of check_region to avoid races, and other things that I've
posted as being my current TODO list) we could do this as well to make the
source code smaller and more easier to read (yes, this is debatable, I think it
becomes more clean, other think otherwise, I'm just following what Linus said
he prefer).
Again, I apreciate a lot receiving feedbacks like this, it helps me in deciding
what to do next to help clean and fix parts of the kernel that I can with the
knowledge I have, which will be enhanced (I'm learning a lot doing these
things, thank you for allowing me to do this) when I receive feedback 8)
- Arnaldo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:24 EST