linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] i2o: add missing destroy_workqueue() on error in i2o_driver

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]

Date:	Tue, 24 Sep 2013 16:46:46 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com>
Cc:	keescook@...omium.org, yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2o: add missing destroy_workqueue() on error in
 i2o_driver_register()

On Mon, 23 Sep 2013 17:56:56 +0800 Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com> wrote:

> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>
> 
> Add the missing destroy_workqueue() before return from
> i2o_driver_register() in the error handling case.

yup.

> --- a/drivers/message/i2o/driver.c
> +++ b/drivers/message/i2o/driver.c
> @@ -105,7 +105,8 @@ int i2o_driver_register(struct i2o_driver *drv)
>  			osm_err("too many drivers registered, increase "
>  				"max_drivers\n");
>  			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i2o_drivers_lock, flags);
> -			return -EFAULT;
> +			rc = -EFAULT;

Why on earth does this function return -EFAULT (twice)?  Imagine the poor
user's confusion if that code gets propagated back to his application
or shell.

--
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/