linux-kernel - Re: [Patch] [mm] More driver core fixes for -mm

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20060725104621.4bd0aa1a@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:46:21 +0200
From:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, greg@...ah.com
Subject: Re: [Patch] [mm] More driver core fixes for -mm

On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 01:08:52 -0700,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org> wrote:

> Removing symlinks seems like a good idea.  Leaving them around might cause
> a subsequent driver load to fail due to EEXIST (assuming that the caller
> checks error codes, as if).
> 
> I assume you're referring to error paths here?

Yes, that was my reasoning.

> But I made bus_attach_device() convert the positive return value to zero. 
> See
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.18-rc1/2.6.18-rc1-mm2/hot-fixes/drivers-base-check-errors-fix.patch.

Missed that, sorry.

> 
> Is there a reason to propagate this irritating "1" back out of
> bus_attach_device() as well?

Probably not. Nobody cares whether the device was bound to a driver or
not.

-- 
Cornelia Huck
Linux for zSeries Developer
Tel.: +49-7031-16-4837, Mail: cornelia.huck@...ibm.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/