linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] ramoops: use pstore interface

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4EC5C753.6040904@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 18 Nov 2011 10:47:47 +0800
From:	Chen Gong <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>,
	Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ramoops: use pstore interface

[...]
>>> +       /* TODO(kees): It shouldn't be possible to remove ramoops since
>>> +        * pstore doesn't support unregistering yet. When it does, remove
>>> +        * this early return and add the unregister where noted below.
>>> +        */
>>> +       return -EBUSY;
>>
>> This style is not reasonable. Maybe it should have a better wrap.
>
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean. It's wrapped roughly to
> column 75 already. What would be better for this comment? Or did you
> mean I shouldn't have unreachable code?

I mean you shouldn't write unreachable codes. It looks weird.

>
>> BTW, you need to update Documentation/ramoops.txt
>
> Ah! Yes, thanks for the reminder.
>
> -Kees
>

--
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/