From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749C6C73C46 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 16:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53C5B21670 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 16:38:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726618AbfGIQif (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2019 12:38:35 -0400 Received: from mga17.intel.com ([192.55.52.151]:35477 "EHLO mga17.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725816AbfGIQie (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Jul 2019 12:38:34 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Jul 2019 09:38:34 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.63,470,1557212400"; d="scan'208";a="173613342" Received: from mmaitert-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.249.34.54]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Jul 2019 09:38:28 -0700 Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 19:38:27 +0300 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Mimi Zohar , Nayna Jain , linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe , Sachin Sant , George Wilson , Michael Ellerman , Michal Suchanek , Peter Huewe Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tpm: tpm_ibm_vtpm: Fix unallocated banks Message-ID: <20190709163827.2u6jeflrhg44q7dy@linux.intel.com> References: <1562458725-15999-1-git-send-email-nayna@linux.ibm.com> <586c629b6d3c718f0c1585d77fe175fe007b27b1.camel@linux.intel.com> <1562624644.11461.66.camel@linux.ibm.com> <20190708224304.GA25838@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20190708224304.GA25838@infradead.org> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 03:43:04PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2019 at 06:24:04PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote: > > > static int tpm_get_pcr_allocation(struct tpm_chip *chip) > > > { > > > int rc; > > > > > > rc = (chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_TPM2) ? > > > tpm2_get_pcr_allocation(chip) : > > > tpm1_get_pcr_allocation(chip); > > > > > > > > return rc > 0 ? -ENODEV : rc; > > > } > > > > > > This addresses the issue that Stefan also pointed out. You have to > > > deal with the TPM error codes. > > > > Hm, in the past I was told by Christoph not to use the ternary > > operator.  Have things changed?  Other than removing the comment, the > > only other difference is the return. > > In the end it is a matter of personal preference, but I find the > quote version above using the ternary horribly obsfucated. I fully agree that the return statement is an obsfucated mess and not a good place at all for using ternary operator. /Jarkko