On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld <ja...@zx2c4.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:31 AM, Theodore Ts'o <ty...@mit.edu> wrote:
>> I'm guessing you changed key_alloc_serial() to return an int back when
>> you were thinking that you might use get_random_bytes_wait(), which
>> could return -ERESTARTSYS.
>> Now that you're not doing this, but using get_random_u32() instead,
>> there's no point to change the function signature of
>> key_alloc_serial() and add an error check in key_alloc() that will
>> never fail, right?  That's just adding a dead code path.  Which the
>> compiler can probably optimize away, but why make the code slightly
>> harder to read than necessasry?
> Good catch, and thanks for reading these so thoroughly that you caught
> the churn artifacts. Do you want me to clean this up and resubmit, or
> are you planning on adjusting it in the dev branch?

Fixed it up here if you just want to grab this instead:


Reply via email to