linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: imx: fix error handling

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]

Date:	Sat, 17 May 2014 00:47:33 +0200
From:	Emil Goode <emilgoode@...il.com>
To:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:	Uwe Kleine-König 
	<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: imx: fix error handling


On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 01:21:08AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 09:24:51PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > I didn't check if it is easily possible, but converting this file to use
> > platform_device_register_full might simplify it considerably.
> 
> In a separate patch, though, please.

Will consider another patch.

> 
> > 
> > I'm not sure this fix is critical, because the problem happens if an
> > allocation during boot fails. But still, if you want to get this fix
> > into a stable release, you should simplify it, i.e. don't do the code
> > reorganisations. (Also the "more clear" part seems to be subjective, I
> > like the error handling better as it is now. But that might only be me.)
> 
> Emil's error handling is done exactly in the correct way...  The error
> path and success path are separate.  Unwinding in the reverse order.
> The label names describe the label locations.  Most days I spend hours
> looking at linux kernel error handling and I can assure you that
> sensible labels like this are a rare and wonderful gift.
> 
> It's hard for me to imagine how anyone could defend the original error
> handling.  The label was "err".  The error handling was randomly plopped
> in the middle of the success handling.  Whenever I see new "creative"
> error handling like this it drives me nuts because obviously it's going
> to be buggy like a swamp picnic.

Thank you for the colorful reply, I guess there is no need for me to
further defend my choice of labels :)

Best regards,

Emil Goode
--
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/