netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] net-gianfar: Less function calls in gfar_ethflow_to_filer

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, 1 Jan 2016 14:05:15 +0100 (CET)
From:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
cc:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@...escale.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] net-gianfar: Less function calls in
 gfar_ethflow_to_filer_table() after error detection

On Fri, 1 Jan 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/gianfar_ethtool.c
> >> @@ -778,11 +778,13 @@ static int gfar_ethflow_to_filer_table(struct gfar_private *priv, u64 ethflow,
> >>  
> >>  	local_rqfpr = kmalloc_array(MAX_FILER_IDX + 1, sizeof(unsigned int),
> >>  				    GFP_KERNEL);
> >> +	if (!local_rqfpr)
> >> +		return 1;
> > 
> > Why return 1?  Previously 0 was returned.
> 
> You are right. - Unfortunately, I made a mistake at this place
> of my update suggestion.
> 
> 
> > Normally, one returns -ENOMEM for this case, but it looks like this 
> > function is returning 0 on failure.
> 
> Should a symbol like "false" be used instead of such a special number?

Maybe it's better than 0 and 1...

julia
--
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