linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86: mcheck: call put_device on device

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Dec 2013 18:01:50 +0100
From:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:	"Chen, Gong" <gong.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Levente Kurusa <levex@...ux.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	EDAC <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: mcheck: call put_device on device_register failure

Can you please fix your

Mail-Followup-To:

header? It is impossible to reply to your emails without fiddling with
the To: and Cc: by hand which gets very annoying over time.

On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:23:30PM -0500, Chen, Gong wrote:
> I have some concerns about it. if device_register is failed, it will
> backtraces all kinds of conditions automatically, including put_device
> definately. So do we really need an extra put_device when it returns
> failure?

Do you mean the "done:" label in device_add() which does put_device()
and which gets called by device_register()?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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/