Re: [PATCH 3/4] char/tpm: Improve a size determination in nine functions
From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Tue Oct 17 2017 - 09:02:54 EST
On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 08:52 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-10-17 at 11:50 +0000, Alexander.Steffen@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> wrote:
> > > > Replace the specification of data structures by pointer
> > > > dereferences
> > > > as the parameter for the operator "sizeof" to make the
> > > > corresponding
> > > > size
> > > > determination a bit safer according to the Linux coding style
> > > > convention.
> > >
> > >
> > > This patch does one style in favor of the other.
> >
> > I actually prefer that style, so I'd welcome this change :)
>
> Style changes should be reviewed and documented, like any other code
> change, and added to Documentation/process/coding-style.rst or an
> equivalent file.
+1.
> > > At the end it's Jarkko's call, though I would NAK this as I think
> > > some
> > > one already told this to you for some other similar patch(es).
> > >
> > >
> > > I even would suggest to stop doing this noisy stuff, which keeps
> > > people
> > > busy for nothing.
> >
> > Cleaning up old code is also worth something, even if does not
> > change one bit in the assembly output in the end...
>
> Wow, you're opening the door really wide for all sorts of trivial
> changes! Hope you have the time and inclination to review and comment
> on all of them. I certainly don't.
Moreover and not so obvious is an open door for making back port of
*real* fixes much harder!
> There is a major difference between adding these sorts of checks to
> the tools in the scripts directory or even to the zero day bots that
> catch different sorts of errors, BEFORE code is upstreamed, and
> patches like these, after the fact.
+1.
> After the code has been upstreamed, it is a lot more difficult to
> justify changes like this. It impacts both code that is being
> developed AND backporting bug fixes.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Intel Finland Oy