linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 2/2] iio: inkern: put the IIO device when mem alloc gets failed

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: <A874F61F95741C4A9BA573A70FE3998F41EF53A7@DQHE02.ent.ti.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Sep 2012 04:56:17 +0000
From:	"Kim, Milo" <Milo.Kim@...com>
To:	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
CC:	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>,
	"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/2] iio: inkern: put the IIO device when mem alloc gets
 failed

> I can see your point, but Lars-Peter's way is the more commonly used
> approach
> so lets go with the ancient arguement of making it look like what those
> reading the code expect to see ;)

Two chained patches were sent.
[PATCH 1/2] iio: inkern: put the IIO device when it fails to allocate memory
[PATCH 2/2] iio: inkern: clean up error return code

The first patch is same as previous one.
The second one is for fixing error return code which Lars had suggested.
I'd like to divide two things for better review.
Many thanks !

Best Regards,
Milo
--
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/