linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed

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: <20160308142217.GB9864@ulmo.nvidia.com>
Date:	Tue, 8 Mar 2016 15:22:19 +0100
From:	Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
To:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
CC:	<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	<pawel.moll@....com>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] gpio: gpiolib: Print error number if gpio hog failed

On Tue, Mar 08, 2016 at 05:32:05PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
> Print the error number of GPIO hog failed during
> its configurations. This helps in identifying the
> failure without instrumenting the code.

Please use up all 72 characters per line at your disposal. Excessively
short lines are hard to read.

> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 9 +++++----
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> index bc788b9..7575ebb 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
> @@ -2621,15 +2621,16 @@ int gpiod_hog(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *name,
>  
>  	local_desc = gpiochip_request_own_desc(chip, hwnum, name);
>  	if (IS_ERR(local_desc)) {
> -		pr_err("requesting hog GPIO %s (chip %s, offset %d) failed\n",
> -		       name, chip->label, hwnum);
> +		status = PTR_ERR(local_desc);
> +		pr_err("requesting hog GPIO %s, chip %s, offset %d failed %d\n",
> +		       name, chip->label, hwnum, status);

I find this type of format hard to read. I prefer a semi-colon to
separate the message from the failure reason (i.e. error code).

Besides that I don't understand why you're dropping the parentheses
around the "chip %s, offset %d", I found that easier on the eye.

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (820 bytes)