linux-kernel - Re: clk/Renesas-MSTP: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation

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:   Fri, 16 Sep 2016 07:21:12 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Simon Horman <horms+renesas@...ge.net.au>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org" <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>,
        Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: clk/Renesas-MSTP: Delete an error message for a failed memory
 allocation

>> Does this wish influence the handling of suggested changes for the source
>> file "drivers/clk/renesas/clk-mstp.c" anyhow?
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9332363/
> 
> Yes, please submit a new version of this patch that removes all the memory 
> allocation error messages from drivers/clk/renesas/ in one go.

I find this kind of feedback a bit surprising and it seems to be promising
to increase software development in this design direction.
Have you got any corresponding scripts for the semantic patch language
prepared to make such a source code adjustment safer (and a bit more convenient
with the help of the Coccinelle software)?

I am also curious on how the change acceptance will evolve for the other
three update steps from this patch series when this one indicates further
software update opportunities already.

Regards,
Markus