linux-kernel - Re: check device_create_file() return code in usb_create_sysfs_intf

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]

Date:	Thu, 24 Mar 2011 17:05:29 +0200
From:	Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: check device_create_file() return code in
 usb_create_sysfs_intf_files()

On (03/24/11 10:55), Alan Stern wrote:
> > I just noticed that usb_create_sysfs_intf_files() ignores device_create_file() 
> > return code and sets intf->sysfs_files_created to 1, even if sysfs_add_file_mode() 
> > returned -ENOMEM (or later sysfs_add_one() returned -EEXIST).
> > 
> > Shouldn't we check retval for 0 before setting intf->sysfs_files_created?
> 
> No.  We want this routine to succeed even if the sysfs files can't be 
> created.  The interface string attribute is more or less optional.
> 
> It would be okay to add a comment explaining this, so that other people
> don't make the same mistake (which has already happened -- you're not
> the first).
> 

Thanks. Sorry for the noise then.
Well, in that case, I guess, `int retval;' can be removed, since it's 
unused.


Best,
	Sergey

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped