diff options
| author | Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com> | 2019-10-06 10:30:28 +1100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> | 2019-10-07 02:03:07 +0200 |
| commit | c90012ac85c24547e5c3468ef00aabf44aa7332d (patch) | |
| tree | bd1f9f766105c864a30c4278ad1cbc59887a74aa /lib | |
| parent | da0c9ea146cbe92b832f1b0f694840ea8eb33cce (diff) | |
lib: test_user_copy: style cleanup
While writing the tests for copy_struct_from_user(), I used a construct
that Linus doesn't appear to be too fond of:
On 2019-10-04, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> Hmm. That code is ugly, both before and after the fix.
>
> This just doesn't make sense for so many reasons:
>
> if ((ret |= test(umem_src == NULL, "kmalloc failed")))
>
> where the insanity comes from
>
> - why "|=" when you know that "ret" was zero before (and it had to
> be, for the test to make sense)
>
> - why do this as a single line anyway?
>
> - don't do the stupid "double parenthesis" to hide a warning. Make it
> use an actual comparison if you add a layer of parentheses.
So instead, use a bog-standard check that isn't nearly as ugly.
Fixes: 341115822f88 ("usercopy: Add parentheses around assignment in test_copy_struct_from_user")
Fixes: f5a1a536fa14 ("lib: introduce copy_struct_from_user() helper")
Signed-off-by: Aleksa Sarai <cyphar@cyphar.com>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20191005233028.18566-1-cyphar@cyphar.com
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'lib')
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/test_user_copy.c | 15 |
1 files changed, 9 insertions, 6 deletions
diff --git a/lib/test_user_copy.c b/lib/test_user_copy.c index e365ace06538..ad2372727b1b 100644 --- a/lib/test_user_copy.c +++ b/lib/test_user_copy.c @@ -52,13 +52,14 @@ static int test_check_nonzero_user(char *kmem, char __user *umem, size_t size) size_t zero_end = size - zero_start; /* - * We conduct a series of check_nonzero_user() tests on a block of memory - * with the following byte-pattern (trying every possible [start,end] - * pair): + * We conduct a series of check_nonzero_user() tests on a block of + * memory with the following byte-pattern (trying every possible + * [start,end] pair): * * [ 00 ff 00 ff ... 00 00 00 00 ... ff 00 ff 00 ] * - * And we verify that check_nonzero_user() acts identically to memchr_inv(). + * And we verify that check_nonzero_user() acts identically to + * memchr_inv(). */ memset(kmem, 0x0, size); @@ -93,11 +94,13 @@ static int test_copy_struct_from_user(char *kmem, char __user *umem, size_t ksize, usize; umem_src = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL); - if ((ret |= test(umem_src == NULL, "kmalloc failed"))) + ret = test(umem_src == NULL, "kmalloc failed"); + if (ret) goto out_free; expected = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL); - if ((ret |= test(expected == NULL, "kmalloc failed"))) + ret = test(expected == NULL, "kmalloc failed"); + if (ret) goto out_free; /* Fill umem with a fixed byte pattern. */ |