linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] Annotate gpio-configuration with __must

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:	Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:27:18 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Annotate gpio-configuration with __must_check

On Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 05:51:06PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Here is a small series generating a lot of warnings, especially in board
> bringup-files. Still, I think it is worthwhile to be strict about checking
> return values of gpio-configuration-functions. My suggestion to keep the noise
> a bit lower is to put it into linux-next for one cycle and then merge it for
> 2.6.39? That should give people some time to fix the issues in time. Looking
> forward to comments.

It's ok to add this type of thing, but please, go through and fix the
warnings at the same time.  Otherwise it's a bit rude to force others to
fix their code for something that you did.

Care to also send those patches along?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/