linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: can: af_can.c: Fix checkpatch warnings

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]

Message-ID: <CACTFLAM4DtRGvEFQo5yXhR4Sjx8hKBJoNqARqA5U+9iQK=gkBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:05:54 +0100
From:	Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>
To:	Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
Cc:	Valentin Ilie <valentin.ilie@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: can: af_can.c: Fix checkpatch warnings

On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net> wrote:
> Hallo Valentin,
>
> thanks for the idea for the cleanup.
>
> But if you replace the the printk() statements it's worth to check if code
> fits into a single line now, e.g.
>
> On 10.03.2013 13:28, Valentin Ilie wrote:
>
>                 r = NULL;
>> @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ int can_proto_register(const struct can_proto *cp)
>>       int err = 0;
>>
>>       if (proto < 0 || proto >= CAN_NPROTO) {
>> -             printk(KERN_ERR "can: protocol number %d out of range\n",
>> +             pr_err("can: protocol number %d out of range\n",
>>                      proto);
>
>
> here " ,proto);" can obviously be move into the previous line while preserving
> the 80 chars per line rule.
>
>
>>               return -EINVAL;
>>       }
>> @@ -761,7 +761,7 @@ int can_proto_register(const struct can_proto *cp)
>>       mutex_lock(&proto_tab_lock);
>>
>>       if (proto_tab[proto]) {
>> -             printk(KERN_ERR "can: protocol %d already registered\n",
>> +             pr_err("can: protocol %d already registered\n",
>>                      proto);
>
>
> here too
>
>>               err = -EBUSY;
>>       } else
>> @@ -817,8 +817,7 @@ static int can_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long msg,
>>               /* create new dev_rcv_lists for this device */
>>               d = kzalloc(sizeof(*d), GFP_KERNEL);
>>               if (!d) {
>> -                     printk(KERN_ERR
>> -                            "can: allocation of receive list failed\n");
>> +                     pr_err("can: allocation of receive list failed\n");
>>                       return NOTIFY_DONE;
>>               }
>
>
> As i've seen in former patches from Joe Perches OOM messages are obsolete.
>
> You could write
>
> if(!d)
>         return NOTIFY_DONE;
>
> here instead.

While at it, why not switch to dev_err() instead?


Daniel
--
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/