linux-kernel - Re: [patch 2/3] Add flags parameter to reserve_bootmem

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:	Sun, 8 Jun 2008 19:12:00 +0200
From:	Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>
To:	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:	kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
	vgoyal@...hat.com, anderson@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch 2/3] Add flags parameter to reserve_bootmem_generic()

* WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> [2008-06-08 22:26]:
>
> Since 'reserve_bootmem_generic' is changed from 'void' to 'int',
> we should check its return value for failure when possible, right?

That may make sense here, but that's unrelated to my change.

Just because the error *can* be caught by checking the return value
doesn't mean that it *must* be caught always. It was silently ignored
before in the efi_reserve_bootmem() function before, and so is it now.
No behaviour change.



Bernhard
-- 
Bernhard Walle, SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Architecture Maintenance
--
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/