On Sun, 2020-08-16 at 09:42 +0800, Zhiqiang Liu wrote:
> In checker_get func, input name will be checked before
> calling checker_class_lookup func, in which name will
> also be checked.
>
> Here, we just remove useless input name check in checker_get func.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqian...@huawei.com>
> Signed-off-by: lixiaokeng <lixiaok...@huawei.com>
> ---
> libmultipath/checkers.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Nack. Better safe than sorry. If you look at the generated assembly,
you'll see that the compiler optimizes this double check away, so
doesn't inflict runtime overhead, while it makes it easier to verify
the code.
I'd ack this if we had a solid convention in the multipath-tools code
to check parameters always (only) in the callee. But so far we don't.
I guess if we want to do that, we'd first need to agree on and
implement a common convention for return values, too.
If checker_class_lookup() was non-static and/or the code was executed
very often, things would also look different to me. But both is not the
case.
Regards,
Martin
>
> diff --git a/libmultipath/checkers.c b/libmultipath/checkers.c
> index f7ddd53..ac41d64 100644
> --- a/libmultipath/checkers.c
> +++ b/libmultipath/checkers.c
> @@ -361,11 +361,10 @@ void checker_get(const char *multipath_dir,
> struct checker *dst,
> if (!dst)
> return;
>
> - if (name && strlen(name)) {
> - src = checker_class_lookup(name);
> - if (!src)
> - src = add_checker_class(multipath_dir, name);
> - }
> + src = checker_class_lookup(name);
> + if (!src)
> + src = add_checker_class(multipath_dir, name);
> +
> dst->cls = src;
> if (!src)
> return;
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
