linux-kernel - Re: [Power-supply]: Error handling in max17042

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <11719608.199941314340343549.JavaMail.weblogic@epml19>
Date:	Fri, 26 Aug 2011 06:32:24 +0000 (GMT)
From:	MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>
To:	"Pallala, Ramakrishna" <ramakrishna.pallala@...el.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	"dwmw2@...radead.org" <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"cbouatmailru@...il.com" <cbouatmailru@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Power-supply]: Error handling in max17042_battery.c

Sender : Pallala, Ramakrishna<ramakrishna.pallala@...el.com> Date : 2011-08-26 14:46 (GMT+09:00)
> Hi All,
> 
> I am working on the I2C based max17042 fuel gauge driver
> Which is drivers/power/max17042_battery.c
> 
> In max17042_get_property(...), the values returned by
> Max17042_read_reg are directly assigned to the variables,
> even if the read results in an error. Shouldn't we check
> for the 'correctness' of the returned values and then
> assign them ? Can I submit a patch to change this ?
> 
> Or Is this done intentionally ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ram
> 

Hello,

I did not ignore and return the error values from max17042_read_reg() intentionally, I've just missed them somehow (maybe was too lazy that day?). 

Handling errors from max17042_read_reg() at the side of max17042_get_property() is a feature missing. And, I'd be much appreciated if you'd send the patch you've mentioned.

Thank you,
MyungJoo