lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] net: ipv4: Use BUG_ON directly instead of a if condition followed by BUG
On 2018/9/11 17:11, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 9/11/2018 11:59 AM, zhong jiang wrote:
>
>>>> The if condition can be removed if we use BUG_ON directly.
>>>> The issule is detected with the help of Coccinelle.
>>>
>>> Issue?
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: zhong jiang <zhongjiang@huawei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 8 ++++----
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>>>> index 62508a2..893bde3 100644
>>>> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>>>> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>>>> @@ -4934,8 +4934,8 @@ void tcp_rbtree_insert(struct rb_root *root, struct sk_buff *skb)
>>>> BUG_ON(offset < 0);
>>>> if (size > 0) {
>>>> size = min(copy, size);
>>>> - if (skb_copy_bits(skb, offset, skb_put(nskb, size), size))
>>>> - BUG();
>>>> + BUG(skb_copy_bits(skb, offset,
>>>
>>> You said BUG_ON()?
>> Yep. Do you think that it is worthing to do
>
> I think BUG() doesn't take parameters, BUG_ON() does. Have you tried to build the kernel with your patch at all?
>
I know that the patch should be BUG_ON instead of BUG. This is my mistake. I just want to know that it is worthing to do so.


Thanks,
zhong jiang
>> Thanks,
>> zhong jiang
> [...]
>
> MBR, Sergei
>
>
>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-11 11:20    [W:0.073 / U:2.964 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site