linux-kernel - qustion about eeh_add_virt

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 13 Aug 2017 16:54:37 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     ruscur@...sell.cc, benh@...nel.crashing.org, paulus@...ba.org,
        mpe@...erman.id.au, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
cc:     hch@...radead.org
Subject: qustion about eeh_add_virt_device

Hello,

At the suggestion of Christoph Hellwig, I am working on inlining the
functions stored in the err_handler field of a pci_driver structure into
the pci_driver structure itself.  A number of functions in the file
arch/powerpc/kernel/eeh_driver.c have code like:

        if (!driver->err_handler ||
            !driver->err_handler->error_detected) {
                eeh_pcid_put(dev);
                return NULL;
        }

This I would just convert to:

        if (!driver->error_detected) {
                eeh_pcid_put(dev);
                return NULL;
        }

But I am not sure what is best to do about eeh_add_virt_device, which
contains:

                if (driver->err_handler)
		        return NULL;

Should I try to find a subfield of the err_handler that is guaranteed to
be there if anything is there?  Or could the test just be dropped, leaving
a direct return NULL?

thanks,
julia