linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] drivercore: add new error value for deferred probe

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:	Fri, 07 Oct 2011 19:28:33 -0400
From:	Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu
To:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, "G, Manjunath Kondaiah" <manjugk@...com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Dilan Lee <dilee@...dia.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Manjunath GKondaiah <manjunath.gkondaiah@...aro.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] drivercore: add new error value for deferred probe

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 16:12:45 MDT, Grant Likely said:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 10:33:06AM +0500, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:

> >> +#define EPROBE_DEFER 517     /* restart probe again after some time */
> >
> > Can we really do this?

> According to Arnd, yes this is okay.

> >  Isn't this some user/kernel api here?

> > What's wrong with just "overloading" on top of an existing error code?
> > Surely one of the other 516 types could be used here, right?

> overloading makes it really hard to find the users at a later date.

Would proposing '#define EPROBE_DEFER EAGAIN' be acceptable to everybody? That
would allow overloading EAGAIN, but still make it easy to tell the usages apart
if we need to separate them later...


Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped