Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 10:50:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: i386/21329: change to allow vm86 interrupt calls from userland Message-ID: <200009171750.KAA24874@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR i386/21329; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Bill Fumerola <billf@chimesnet.com>
To: Jonathan Chen <jon@spock.org>
Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: i386/21329: change to allow vm86 interrupt calls from userland
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2000 13:43:43 -0400
On Sun, Sep 17, 2000 at 01:41:10PM -0400, Jonathan Chen wrote:
> Yes, I'm aware of what style() says, but gcc -Wall, in its brokenness,
> "suggests parentheses around assignment used as truth value". I have no
> clue why gcc would think extra parentheses would be cool there, but I
> decided to silence gcc instead of following style() (and didn't think of
> the != 0 bit). Anyway, this should be better:
I think it's gcc's roundabout way of encouraging the practice of explicit
checks. This makes even more sense when you get into things returning NULL
and abusing the if(!something_that_might_be_null) case.
>
[...]
> - if (error = copyin(ua.sub_args, &sa, sizeof(sa)))
> + if (p->p_cred->pc_ucred->cr_uid != 0) return EPERM;
> +
> + if (0 != (error = copyin(ua.sub_args, &sa, sizeof(sa))))
> return (error);
> - if (error = vm86_intcall(sa.intnum, &sa.vmf))
> + if (0 != (error = vm86_intcall(sa.intnum, &sa.vmf)))
> return (error);
> error = copyout(&sa, ua.sub_args, sizeof(sa));
> }
> break;
> -#endif
#1. You still need the \nreturn EPERM;
#2. I'd put the != 0 after the call.
--
Bill Fumerola - Network Architect, BOFH / Chimes, Inc.
billf@chimesnet.com / billf@FreeBSD.org
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200009171750.KAA24874>