linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get

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, 28 Dec 2018 13:53:25 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     robh@...nel.org, a.hajda@...sung.com, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        b.zolnierkie@...sung.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, javierm@...hat.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        m.szyprowski@...sung.com, rafael@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Add an error message to platform_get_irq*()

Quoting Russell King - ARM Linux (2018-12-22 02:33:20)
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:24:52PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > A grep of the kernel shows that many drivers print an error message if
> > they fail to get the irq they're looking for. Furthermore, those drivers
> > all decide to print the device name, or not, and the irq they were
> > requesting, or not, etc. Let's consolidate all these error messages into
> > the API itself, allowing us to get rid of the error messages in each
> > driver.
> ...
> > +error:
> > +     if (warn)
> > +             dev_err(&dev->dev, "IRQ%d not found\n", num);
> 
> Please don't use the notation IRQn - this is normally used when
> referring to interrupt numbers (such as those seen in
> /proc/interrupts) rather than a per-device interrupt index.
> Grep for IRQ% in drivers/ for many examples.
> 
> dev_err(&dev->dev, "IRQ index %u not found: %d\n", num, ret);

Sure! I'll use that one.

> 
> would be better - note also the use of %u for unsigned integers.
> Using %d for them is IMHO sloppy coding.
> 

Ok.