linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4] mfd: dm355evm_msp: Refactoring for add

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: <20160809093022.GU5243@dell>
Date:	Tue, 9 Aug 2016 10:30:22 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] mfd: dm355evm_msp: Refactoring for add_child()

On Mon, 08 Aug 2016, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> v4: Further feedback was integrated into this message.
> > 
> > This is not a good change-log.  What actually changed?
> 
> Which kind of information would you find more useful in this case?

That's for you to tell me surely?

If I wanted to know what changed, I would normally look at the patch
change-log.  But the change-log in this patch says "I did some
stuff".  What stuff did you change?  Which review comments did you
tend to?
> 
> >> @@ -222,19 +222,20 @@ static struct device *add_child(struct i2c_client *client, const char *name,
> >>  		status = platform_device_add_resources(pdev, &r, 1);
> >>  		if (status < 0) {
> >>  			dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "can't add irq\n");
> >> -			goto err;
> >> +			goto put_device;
> >>  		}
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >>  	status = platform_device_add(pdev);
> >> +	if (status)
> >> +		goto put_device;
> >>  
> >> -err:
> >> -	if (status < 0) {
> >> -		platform_device_put(pdev);
> >> -		dev_err(&client->dev, "can't add %s dev\n", name);
> >> -		return ERR_PTR(status);
> >> -	}
> >>  	return &pdev->dev;
> >> +
> >> +put_device:
> >> +	platform_device_put(pdev);
> >> +	dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to add device %s\n", name);
> > 
> > ... and remove this line.
> 
> -Do you really want that this error message should be deleted?
> 
> How does this response fit to your request to introduce such a message
> for the function "add_numbered_child" (on 2016-06-08)?
> https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1162299.html
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/8/467

You've lost the context.  The "..." is meant to intimate that it
follows on from a previous comment.  In this case:

>  > status = platform_device_add_data(pdev, pdata, pdata_len);
>  > if (status < 0) {
>  > 	dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "can't add platform_data\n");
>
>  Please take the opportunity to convert these to dev_err()s.

So, convert the specific dev_dbg() calls to dev_err() and remove the
contentless one at the bottom.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog