From: Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com>
To: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
Cc: edk2-devel@lists.01.org, "Shi, Steven" <steven.shi@intel.com>,
Qin Long <qin.long@intel.com>, Ting Ye <ting.ye@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] CryptoPkg/BaseCryptLib: remove some duplicate initializations.
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 14:21:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171020182147.4rsisbduvvjweb2z@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0a2c301c-58a8-ecf7-8d1a-40dd5ab8bc8e@redhat.com>
> Assuming the maintainers are fine with the patch as well, I suggest that
> they please replace the word "initializations" with "assignments" in the
> subject, to be pedantic on the C-lang level.
Well, that's why I said "initializations" instead of "initializers", but if
it's more clear to you, I'm fine with your way.
> (Side note: I would even move OldSize to a lot tighter scope:
>
> > diff --git a/CryptoPkg/Library/BaseCryptLib/Pk/CryptPkcs7Verify.c b/CryptoPkg/Library/BaseCryptLib/Pk/CryptPkcs7Verify.c
> > index d564591cb7f9..31a9ecd59ff6 100644
> > --- a/CryptoPkg/Library/BaseCryptLib/Pk/CryptPkcs7Verify.c
> > +++ b/CryptoPkg/Library/BaseCryptLib/Pk/CryptPkcs7Verify.c
> > @@ -477,7 +477,6 @@ Pkcs7GetCertificatesList (
> > UINT8 *CertBuf;
> > UINT8 *OldBuf;
> > UINTN BufferSize;
> > - UINTN OldSize;
> > UINT8 *SingleCert;
> > UINTN CertSize;
> >
> > @@ -612,10 +611,11 @@ Pkcs7GetCertificatesList (
> >
> > if (CtxChain != NULL) {
> > BufferSize = sizeof (UINT8);
> > - OldSize = BufferSize;
> > CertBuf = NULL;
> >
> > for (Index = 0; ; Index++) {
> > + UINTN OldSize;
> > +
> > Status = X509PopCertificate (CtxChain, &SingleCert, &CertSize);
> > if (!Status) {
> > break;
> > @@ -656,10 +656,11 @@ Pkcs7GetCertificatesList (
> >
> > if (CtxUntrusted != NULL) {
> > BufferSize = sizeof (UINT8);
> > - OldSize = BufferSize;
> > CertBuf = NULL;
> >
> > for (Index = 0; ; Index++) {
> > + UINTN OldSize;
> > +
> > Status = X509PopCertificate (CtxUntrusted, &SingleCert, &CertSize);
> > if (!Status) {
> > break;
>
> However, many edk2 maintainers don't like tight scoping like this.)
I had considered this and guessed it was probably against the coding style or
it would have been done this way already. IMO it's better in every way.
--
Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-20 18:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-20 15:10 [PATCH v1 1/1] CryptoPkg/BaseCryptLib: remove some duplicate initializations Peter Jones
2017-10-20 17:12 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-10-20 18:21 ` Peter Jones [this message]
2017-10-23 3:02 ` Long, Qin
2017-10-24 7:51 ` Laszlo Ersek
2017-10-24 8:15 ` Long, Qin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171020182147.4rsisbduvvjweb2z@redhat.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox