[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <642f4cca.170a0220.db953.9229@mx.google.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 15:50:49 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pstore/ram: Convert to platform remove callback
returning void
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 12:57:30PM -0300, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 01/04/2023 09:00, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > The .remove() callback for a platform driver returns an int which makes
> > many driver authors wrongly assume it's possible to do error handling by
> > returning an error code. However the value returned is (mostly) ignored
> > and this typically results in resource leaks. To improve here there is a
> > quest to make the remove callback return void. In the first step of this
> > quest all drivers are converted to .remove_new() which already returns
> > void.
> >
> > Trivially convert this driver from always returning zero in the remove
> > callback to the void returning variant.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
>
> Thanks, it makes sense for me! Code-wise, it looks fine.
>
> What would be interesting it to mention a mail thread discussing this or
> maybe the patch itself that added the .remove_new() idea
> [https://git.kernel.org/linus/5c5a7680e67b right?].
>
> BTW, nice idea - converting all at once would be a terrible sync effort,
> I guess this way things will go smoothly.
> Feel free to add my:
>
> Reviewed-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
Thanks! Looks good to me.
Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Do you want to take these view some other tree, or should I take this
via my pstore tree?
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists