linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] dma: add __must_check annotation for dmaengine

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: <20150811095852.GW11789@localhost>
Date:	Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:28:52 +0530
From:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To:	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
	peter@...leysoftware.com, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	nsekhar@...com, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, john.ogness@...utronix.de,
	Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] dma: add __must_check annotation for
 dmaengine_pause()

On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 10:00:18PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> In 8250-omap I learned it the hard way that ignoring the return code
> of dmaengine_pause() might be bad because the underlying DMA driver
> might not support the function at all and so not doing what one is
> expecting.
> This patch adds the __must_check annotation as suggested by Russell King.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
> ---
>  include/linux/dmaengine.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/dmaengine.h b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> index 8ad9a4e839f6..4eac4716bded 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dmaengine.h
> @@ -825,7 +825,7 @@ static inline int dmaengine_terminate_all(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  	return -ENOSYS;
>  }
>  
> -static inline int dmaengine_pause(struct dma_chan *chan)
> +static inline int __must_check dmaengine_pause(struct dma_chan *chan)
>  {
>  	if (chan->device->device_pause)
>  		return chan->device->device_pause(chan);

Give that there are bunch of users of this call which may or maynot be using
this, I think putting this check is too stringent

-- 
~Vinod
--
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/