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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <50F13C34.3020808@nvidia.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 16:04:28 +0530 From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com> To: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org> CC: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>, "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT 3/3] ARM: tegra: dts: seaboard: enable keyboard On Saturday 12 January 2013 05:09 AM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 01/11/2013 04:36 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 04:27:07PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 01/11/2013 04:24 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 04:09:59PM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>>> On 01/11/2013 06:33 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>>>> kbc->clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); >>>>>> if (IS_ERR(kbc->clk)) { >>>>>> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to get keyboard clock\n"); >>>>>> err = PTR_ERR(kbc->clk); >>>>>> goto err_iounmap; >>>>>> } >>>>> Should that check be if (!kbc-clk) instead? Or does the common clock >>>>> framework require if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(kbc->clk)); hopefully not since >>>>> IS_ERR_OR_NULL shouldn't be used any more. >>>> /** >>>> * clk_get - lookup and obtain a reference to a clock producer. >>>> * @dev: device for clock "consumer" >>>> * @id: clock consumer ID >>>> * >>>> * Returns a struct clk corresponding to the clock producer, or >>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>> * valid IS_ERR() condition containing errno. ... >>>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >>>> >>>> Or, put another way: >>>> >>>> If (!IS_ERR(clk)) >>>> The_Clock_Is_Valid(); >>>> Else >>>> The_Clock_Is_Invalid(); >>>> The_Error = PTR_ERR(clk); >>> OK, but that doesn't appear to be what happened in practice. >> It's what I've been saying each time I see an abuse, the problem is >> people don't care to read the documentation provided let alone >> understand the interfaces. >> >> That's precisely why IS_ERR_OR_NULL() is to be removed. One less >> thing for someone to throw a dart at as a selection method to use. >> Or maybe roll a dice. Or whatever way they do seem to choose. >> (Whatever that is, it's not based on any sound engineering practice >> I can make out.) > For the record, I did mention that IS_ERR_OR_NULL() should not be the > solution here. And the point of my email to Laxman was that he should go > figure out the answer to my question, which would entail reading the > documentation/code/... Going through clock driver, the clk_get() should return error pointer or valid pointer, atleast not NULL. Probably our clock driver is returning to NULL and hence issue is becasue whole world, it check for IS_ERR or !IS_ERR() and null clk pointer treated as !IS_ERR(). Stephen, Which is the tree on which Prashant changes are applied. I can debug from that tree. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists