netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] net: phy: at803x: simplify using devm_gpiod_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:	Wed, 1 Apr 2015 09:00:01 +0200
From:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	f.fainelli@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linus.walleij@...aro.org, acourbot@...dia.com,
	kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: phy: at803x: simplify using
 devm_gpiod_get_optional and its 4th argument

On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 07:28:38PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 22:08:45 +0200
> 
> > I still think assigning directly to priv->gpiod_reset would fine
> > because having the priv->gpiod_reset NULL is neither more nor less
> > right that ERR_PTR(-ESOMETHING).
> 
> You really want to push my buttons don't you? :-/
> 
> What if someone adds a new resource allocation after this thing and
> then adds an unwind path where something has to be done to the GPIOD
> as part of cleanup?
As I assume that v2 still addresses your concerns it would be ok for me
to not fully agree with you about defensive coding style.
What about you?

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html