linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] pci_request_irq (was [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity)

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:	Mon, 2 Oct 2006 21:09:49 +0000
From:	Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@...e.fr>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
	"Linux-Kernel," <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"J.A. Magall??n" <jamagallon@....com>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] pci_request_irq (was [-mm patch] aic7xxx: check irq validity)

On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 12:15:22PM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 08:00:48PM +0000, Frederik Deweerdt wrote:
> >  /**
> > + * pci_request_irq - Reserve an IRQ for a PCI device
> > + * @pdev: The PCI device whose irq is to be reserved
> > + * handler: The interrupt handler function,
> 
> > + * pci_get_drvdata(pdev) shall be passed as an argument to that function
> 
> I don't think you can (or should) do this.  Move it to the body of the
> comment below.
OK, thanks for pointing this, will do.
> 
> > + * @flags: The flags to be passed to request_irq()
> > + * @name: The name of the device to be associated with the irq
> > + *
> > + * Returns 0 on success, or a negative value on error.  A warning
> > + * message is also printed on failure.
> > + */
> > +int pci_request_irq(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> > +		    irqreturn_t (*handler)(int, void *, struct pt_regs *),
> > +		    unsigned long flags, const char *name)
> > +{
> > +	int rc;
> > +	const char *actual_name = name;
> > +
> > +	rc = is_irq_valid(pdev->irq);
> > +	if (!rc) {
> > +		dev_printk(KERN_ERR, &pdev->dev, "invalid irq #%d\n", pdev->irq);
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	}
> 
> Why is that more readable than
> 
> 	if (!is_irq_valid(pdev->irq)) {
> 		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "invalid irq #%d\n", pdev->irq);
> 		return -EINVAL;
> 	}
> 
Better too.
> > +	if (!actual_name)
> > +		actual_name = pci_name(pdev);
> > +
> > +	return request_irq(pdev->irq, handler, flags | IRQF_SHARED,
> > +			   actual_name, pci_get_drvdata(pdev));
> 
> The driver name is a far more common usage than the pci_name.
> 
> 	return request_irq(pdev->irq, handler, flags | IRQF_SHARED,
> 			name ? name : pdev->driver->name,
> 			pci_get_drvdata(pdev));
OK, thanks for the feedback,
Frederik
> 
> -
> 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/
> 
-
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/