linux-kernel - Re: 3.2.0-07927-gc49c41a: s2ram: Device 'machinecheck1' does not have a release() function, it is broken and must be fixed

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:	Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:37:59 +0300
From:	Sergei Trofimovich <slyich@...il.com>
To:	"Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>,
	"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: 3.2.0-07927-gc49c41a: s2ram: Device 'machinecheck1' does not
 have a release() function, it is broken and must be fixed

> But the only reason I haven't really jumped into writing such a patch
> is that I would prefer to get the semantics right - adding a dummy
> function is IMO something like working around the rules of the driver-core
> framework just to silence the warning. Hence I feel we should resort
> to it _only_ if there is nothing better we can do about this.

Ah, I see. Will ignore the warning.
Thanks for the detailed explanation!

Sorry for the noise.

-- 

  Sergei

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)