From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
The coccinelle report
./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
}
- return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
+ return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
create_and_enter_userns();
@@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
}
- return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
+ return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
--
2.30.2
On 11/24/21 5:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
>
> The coccinelle report
> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
> explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
>
> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> }
> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> create_and_enter_userns();
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> }
> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
>
This change doesn't look right. WEXITSTATUS(status) return could be
> 1 or 0 or negative.
thanks,
-- Shuah
On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 11:26 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 11/24/21 5:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
> >
> > The coccinelle report
> > ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
> > WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> > ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
> > WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> > Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
> > explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
> >
> > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
> > if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> > die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> > }
> > - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> > + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> > }
> >
> > create_and_enter_userns();
> > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
> > if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> > die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> > }
> > - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> > + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> > }
> >
> > orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
> >
>
> This change doesn't look right. WEXITSTATUS(status) return could be
> > 1 or 0 or negative.
The change is at least logically correct.
And isn't WEXITSTATUS range limited from 0->255 ?
https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Exit-Status.html
On 12/3/21 12:50 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 11:26 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 11/24/21 5:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>> From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> The coccinelle report
>>> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
>>> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
>>> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
>>> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
>>> Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
>>> explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
>>>
>>> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>> index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
>>> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
>>> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
>>> }
>>> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
>>> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
>>> }
>>>
>>> create_and_enter_userns();
>>> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
>>> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
>>> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
>>> }
>>> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
>>> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
>>> }
>>>
>>> orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
>>>
>>
>> This change doesn't look right. WEXITSTATUS(status) return could be
>>> 1 or 0 or negative.
>
> The change is at least logically correct.
>
> And isn't WEXITSTATUS range limited from 0->255 ?
>
> https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Exit-Status.html
>
You are right. In any case, I don't see any value in changing the current
logic. The way it is coded is cryptic enough :)
thanks,
-- Shuah
On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 17:24 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 12/3/21 12:50 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 11:26 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > > On 11/24/21 5:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> > > > From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > The coccinelle report
> > > > ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
> > > > WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> > > > ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
> > > > WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
> > > > Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
> > > > explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > > > index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
> > > > @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
> > > > if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> > > > die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> > > > }
> > > > - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> > > > + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > create_and_enter_userns();
> > > > @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
> > > > if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
> > > > die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
> > > > }
> > > > - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
> > > > + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
> > > >
> > >
> > > This change doesn't look right. WEXITSTATUS(status) return could be
> > > > 1 or 0 or negative.
> >
> > The change is at least logically correct.
> >
> > And isn't WEXITSTATUS range limited from 0->255 ?
> >
> > https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Exit-Status.html
> >
>
> You are right. In any case, I don't see any value in changing the current
> logic. The way it is coded is cryptic enough :)
Well, it'd be more like the rest of the kernel when changed.
bool function()
{
...
return <foo> ? true : false;
}
is pretty redundant.
On 12/3/21 8:06 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 17:24 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
>> On 12/3/21 12:50 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2021-12-03 at 11:26 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>> On 11/24/21 5:56 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>>>>> From: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
>>>>>
>>>>> The coccinelle report
>>>>> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:285:54-59:
>>>>> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
>>>>> ./tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c:207:54-59:
>>>>> WARNING: conversion to bool not needed here
>>>>> Relational and logical operators evaluate to bool,
>>>>> explicit conversion is overly verbose and unneeded.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Zeal Robot <[email protected]>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Guang <[email protected]>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c | 4 ++--
>>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>>>> index 584dc6bc3b06..d2917054fe3a 100644
>>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/mount/unprivileged-remount-test.c
>>>>> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ bool test_unpriv_remount(const char *fstype, const char *mount_options,
>>>>> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
>>>>> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
>>>>> }
>>>>> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
>>>>> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> create_and_enter_userns();
>>>>> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static bool test_priv_mount_unpriv_remount(void)
>>>>> if (!WIFEXITED(status)) {
>>>>> die("child did not terminate cleanly\n");
>>>>> }
>>>>> - return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS ? true : false;
>>>>> + return WEXITSTATUS(status) == EXIT_SUCCESS;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> orig_mnt_flags = read_mnt_flags(orig_path);
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This change doesn't look right. WEXITSTATUS(status) return could be
>>>>> 1 or 0 or negative.
>>>
>>> The change is at least logically correct.
>>>
>>> And isn't WEXITSTATUS range limited from 0->255 ?
>>>
>>> https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Exit-Status.html
>>>
>>
>> You are right. In any case, I don't see any value in changing the current
>> logic. The way it is coded is cryptic enough :)
>
> Well, it'd be more like the rest of the kernel when changed.
>
> bool function()
> {
> ...
> return <foo> ? true : false;
> }
>
> is pretty redundant.
>
>
Fair enough.
Yang Guang,
Applied patch. In the future, make sure to use selftests/<test>: convention
for patch summary. I fixed this one for now.
thanks,
-- Shuah