linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] iio/light/max44000: Use common error handling code in max44000

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Thu, 26 Oct 2017 18:39:01 +0100
From:   Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>,
        Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@...el.com>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio/light/max44000: Use common error handling code in
 max44000_probe()

On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 18:50:14 +0200
SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> >> @@ -596,6 +592,10 @@ static int max44000_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >>  	return iio_device_register(indio_dev);
> >> +
> >> +report_failure:
> >> +	dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to write init config: %d\n", ret);  
> > This reduces readability of the code for a very minor gain.  
> 
> I got an other software development view on this aspect.
> 

Sadly I am going to put my foot down here before more time
is wasted. I am not going to discuss it further after this email.
(for others please see the amount of time already wasted on
what are mostly poor code changes from Markus).

> 
> > Printing an error message is not a source of bugs  
> 
> I find such a general information questionable.
> 
> It is also possible to discover various update candidates in this software area.
Judge each one carefully.  You need to be convincingly improving the code
not just obeying rules blindly.

> 
> 
> > or similar unlike unwinding some state, so a unified path makes little sense.  
> 
> How does such a view fit to the section “7) Centralized exiting of functions”
> in the document “coding-style.rst”?
All rules in there need to be applied with care. If they make the code
worse do not blindly apply them.

> 
> Regards,
> Markus
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html