linux-kernel - [00/12] driver core fixes

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

Message-ID: <20060913183827.74530896@gondolin.boeblingen.de.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Sep 2006 18:38:27 +0200
From:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To:	Greg K-H <greg@...ah.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [00/12] driver core fixes

Hi Greg,

following are hacked-up versions of the -mm patches

	more-driver-core-fixes-for-mm.patch
	yet-further-driver-core-fixes-for-mm.patch
	return-code-checking-for-make_class_name.patch

rebased against your kernel tree (as of yesterday).

Except for the rebase, they are basically unchanged from the version in
-mm (some things like bus_attach_device() no longer being tristate, and
class_device_rename() being gone). Patches 11 and 12 are new.

 [01/12] driver core fixes: make_class_name() retval check
 [02/12] driver core fixes: device_register() retval check in platform.c
 [03/12] driver core fixes: fixup platform_device_register_simple()
 [04/12] driver core fixes: retval check in class_register()
 [05/12] driver core fixes: sysfs_create_link() retval check in class.c
 [06/12] driver core fixes: bus_add_attrs() retval check
 [07/12] driver core fixes: bus_add_device() cleanup on error
 [08/12] driver core fixes: device_add() cleanup on error
 [09/12] driver core fixes: bus_attach_device() retval check
 [10/12] driver core fixes: sysfs_create_link() retval check in core.c
 [11/12] driver core fixes: device_create_file() retval check in dmapool.c
 [12/12] driver core fixes: sysfs_create_group() retval in topology.c

Most of the patches but 1, 8, 9 and 10 should be pretty independent of
each other. I'm not sure about patch 12, since the calling function
does not check the return code of topology_add_dev() (but what should
it do if it fails?).

-- 
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/