linux-kernel - Re: __must_check (stir the pot :-))

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: <46497A9D.7000905@garzik.org>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2007 05:17:17 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
CC:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: __must_check (stir the pot :-))

Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> where sysfs_create_file() is marked __must_check and sysdev_create_file()
> isn't.
> 
> So the questions come to mind:  Do we really care if our core
> infrastructure doesn't?  Can we care if the core infrastructure doesn't
> propogate the error returns?


Yes, we should propagate the markers as needed...

	Jeff


-
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/