linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH debugfs: implement symbolic links

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 14 Feb 2007 07:42:08 +0100
From:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Cc:	Peter Oberparleiter <peter.oberparleiter@...ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH debugfs: implement symbolic links

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:31:42 -0800,
Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de> wrote:

> > That makes it easy to get return code checking wrong (especially
> > considering the comment above), and a number of callers do get it wrong.
> 
> They do?

For example, fs/ocfs2/super.c only checks for NULL (while neither
selecting nor depending on debugfs), or drivers/block/pktcdvd.c will
only check for IS_ERR(). (Many callers don't seem to care about return
codes at all.)

> The goal here is not to force the caller to care if debugfs is enabled
> or not.

And that's definetly a good thing. (Looking again, not checking for
IS_ERR() isn't as bad as I thought, as the code will continue to do
nothing if called again for a non-existing dentry.)

> > At the very least we should change the misleading comment.
> 
> agreed, patches always welcome :)

OK, just changing the comment looks like the most sensible thing to do.
I'll roll up a patch.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/