linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] coccinelle: api: check for propagation of error from platform_get

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:	Sun, 27 Dec 2015 14:18:44 +0300
From:	Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc:	Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@...6.fr>,
	Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
	Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] coccinelle: api: check for propagation of error from
 platform_get_irq

On 12/27/2015 9:13 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:

>>     Well, looking again, the patch should be good. I just thought its goal was
>> to fix the code as well...
>
> I could do that for the irq < 0 case, but I think that in that case, kbuild
> will only run the patch version, and the <= cases will not be reported on.
> I don't have a general fix for the <= 0.  Is it even correct to have < in
> some cases and <= in others?

    That's a good question...
    In my prior fixes of this case I preferred to consider IRQ0 valid and so 
used 'irq < 0'. I myself don't share the "IRQ0 is invalid" sentiment...

> julia

MBR, Sergei

--
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/