linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: memblock - Handled failure of debug fs entries creation

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

Message-Id: <20120426162108.b654a920.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date:	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 16:21:08 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Sasikantha babu <sasikanth.v19@...il.com>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: memblock - Handled failure of debug fs entries
 creation

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 01:29:52 +0530
Sasikantha babu <sasikanth.v19@...il.com> wrote:

> 1) Removed already created debug fs entries on failure
> 
> 2) Fixed coding style 80 char per line
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sasikantha babu <sasikanth.v19@...il.com>
> ---
>  mm/memblock.c |   14 +++++++++++---
>  1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> index a44eab3..5553723 100644
> --- a/mm/memblock.c
> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> @@ -966,11 +966,19 @@ static int __init memblock_init_debugfs(void)
>  {
>  	struct dentry *root = debugfs_create_dir("memblock", NULL);
>  	if (!root)
> -		return -ENXIO;
> -	debugfs_create_file("memory", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.memory, &memblock_debug_fops);
> -	debugfs_create_file("reserved", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.reserved, &memblock_debug_fops);
> +		return -ENOMEM;

hm, why the switch to -ENOMEM?

Fact is, debugfs_create_dir() and debugfs_create_file() are stupid
interfaces which don't provide the caller (and hence the user) with any
information about why they failed.  Perhaps memblock_init_debugfs()
should return -EWESUCK.

> +	if (!debugfs_create_file("memory", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.memory,
> +				&memblock_debug_fops))
> +		goto fail;
> +	if (!debugfs_create_file("reserved", S_IRUGO, root, &memblock.reserved,
> +				&memblock_debug_fops))
> +		goto fail;
>  
>  	return 0;
> +fail:
> +	debugfs_remove_recursive(root);
> +	return -ENOMEM;
>  }
>  __initcall(memblock_init_debugfs);

--
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/