linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] driver core: let dev_set_drvdata return int instead of void as it can fail

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:	Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:40:26 +0530
From:	viresh kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>
To:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Shiraz HASHIM <shiraz.hashim@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] driver core: let dev_set_drvdata return int instead
 of void as it can fail

On 04/06/2011 02:54 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> ---
> Hello,
> 
> I wasn't sure what to return when dev_set_drvdata is called with
> dev=NULL.  I choosed 0, but -EINVAL would be OK for me, too. What do you
> think?

Uwe,

I feel -EINVAL would be more appropriate here.
Return value of 0 would mean drvdata is set properly, which is not the case.

Otherwise, patch series looks fine to me. Please add my reviewed-by for all patches.

Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...com>

-- 
viresh
--
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/