linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] m68k: Remove printk statement and add return statement in q40ints.c

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: <CAPDOMVgJ1-L0wvxwkdut9XDsAHNFd_VsEN75W_Thn1P-phgnuw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:56:21 -0400
From:	Nick Krause <xerofoify@...il.com>
To:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	linux-m68k <linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] m68k: Remove printk statement and add return statement in q40ints.c

On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> On 07/22/2014 09:08 PM, Nicholas Krause wrote:
>>
>> This removes the printk statement for irqs not defined by the hardware in
>> function q40_irq_startup and instead returns -ENXIO as stated by the fix
>> me message.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Krause <xerofoify@...il.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/m68k/q40/q40ints.c | 3 +--
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/m68k/q40/q40ints.c b/arch/m68k/q40/q40ints.c
>> index 513f9bb..86f05c0 100644
>> --- a/arch/m68k/q40/q40ints.c
>> +++ b/arch/m68k/q40/q40ints.c
>> @@ -48,8 +48,7 @@ static unsigned int q40_irq_startup(struct irq_data
>> *data)
>>         switch (irq) {
>>         case 1: case 2: case 8: case 9:
>>         case 11: case 12: case 13:
>> -               printk("%s: ISA IRQ %d not implemented by HW\n", __func__,
>> irq);
>> -               /* FIXME return -ENXIO; */
>> +               return -ENXIO;
>
>
> Returning -ENXIO from a function returning an unsigned int isn't really very
> helpful,
> don't you think ?
>
> With all those FIXMEs, you might want to keep in mind that there is
> typically a
> good reason for it. If it was as easy as your proposed fix, you can assume
> that the FIXME would not have been there in the first place.
>
> Guenter
>


Sorry Guenter,
That's fine. can I can change  the return type of the function or is
that going to break things?
Nick
--
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/