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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 13:02:01 +0000 From: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> To: "Ruinskiy, Dima" <dima.ruinskiy@...el.com> Cc: "Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, "Ursulin, Tvrtko" <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, "Ertman, David M" <david.m.ertman@...el.com> Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] e1000e: Undo e1000e_pm_freeze if __e1000_shutdown fails On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 12:43:11PM +0000, Ruinskiy, Dima wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > > >Fixes: 2800209994f8 ("e1000e: Refactor PM flows") > >Bugzilla: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99847 > >Signed-off-by: Chris Wilson <chris@...is-wilson.co.uk> > >Cc: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursulin@...el.com> > >Cc: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> > >Cc: Dave Ertman <davidx.m.ertman@...el.com> > >Cc: Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@...el.com> > >Cc: intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org > >Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org > >--- > > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 9 ++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c > >b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c > >index eccf1da9356b..429a5210230d 100644 > >--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c > >+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c > >@@ -6615,12 +6615,19 @@ static int e1000e_pm_thaw(struct device *dev) > >static int e1000e_pm_suspend(struct device *dev) { > > struct pci_dev *pdev = to_pci_dev(dev); > >+ int rc; > > > > e1000e_flush_lpic(pdev); > > > > e1000e_pm_freeze(dev); > > > >- return __e1000_shutdown(pdev, false); > >+ rc = __e1000_shutdown(pdev, false); > >+ if (rc) { > >+ e1000e_pm_thaw(dev); > >+ return rc; > >+ } > >+ > >+ return 0; > > } > > > > static int e1000e_pm_resume(struct device *dev) > >-- > > Looks reasonable. However, can't you get the same result with fewer code lines? > - return __e1000_shutdown(pdev, false); > + rc = __e1000_shutdown(pdev, false); > + if (rc) > + e1000e_pm_thaw(dev); > + > + return rc; You are welcome to use whatever style is consistent with the rest of the driver. :) -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre
Powered by blists - more mailing lists