Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:23:27 +0100
From: Matthew Wilcox <>
To: Kees Cook <>
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <>,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <>, Leon Romanovsky <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] overflow: Add __must_check attribute to check_*() helpers

On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 02:51:52PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> +/*
> + * Allows to effectively us apply __must_check to a macro so we can have
> + * both the type-agnostic benefits of the macros while also being able to
> + * enforce that the return value is, in fact, checked.
> + */
> +static inline bool __must_check __must_check_bool(bool condition)
> +{
> +	return unlikely(condition);
> +}

I'm fine with the concept, but this is a weirdly-generically-named
function that has a very specific unlikely() in it.  So I'd call
this __must_check_overflow() and then it's obvious that overflow is
unlikely(), whereas it's not obvious that __must_check_bool() is going
to be unlikely().

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.