linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/9] remoteproc: core: Ensure error message is clear

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 11 Aug 2016 08:36:57 +0100
From:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:	Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>
Cc:	Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kernel@...inux.com" <kernel@...inux.com>,
	"patrice.chotard@...com" <patrice.chotard@...com>,
	"ohad@...ery.com" <ohad@...ery.com>,
	"linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"loic.pallardy@...com" <loic.pallardy@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] remoteproc: core: Ensure error message is clear

On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, Suman Anna wrote:

> On 08/09/2016 01:12 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Tue, 09 Aug 2016, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > 
> >> On Thu 04 Aug 02:21 PDT 2016, Lee Jones wrote:
> >>
> >>> Before this patch, the dma_alloc_coherent() failure path printed out:
> >>>
> >>>   "dma_alloc_coherent err: 16760832"
> >>>
> >>> ... alluding to the Linux error code being 16760832, but seeing as
> >>> Linux error codes are all negative, this looks like a signed/unsigned
> >>> issue.  In fact, the message is trying to print the length of the
> >>> requested memory region.  Let's clear that up.
> >>>
> >>> While we're at it, let's standardise the way 'len' is printed.  In
> >>> all other locations 'len' is in hex prefixed by a '0x' for clarity.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> > 
> > Again, this can just be applied.
> > 
> >>> ---
> >>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 5 +++--
> >>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>> index aea29a75c..3566dc9 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c
> >>> @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc,
> >>>  		return -EINVAL;
> >>>  	}
> >>>  
> >>> -	dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: da %x, pa %x, len %x, flags %x\n",
> >>> +	dev_dbg(dev, "carveout rsc: da %x, pa %x, len 0x%x, flags %x\n",
> >>>  			rsc->da, rsc->pa, rsc->len, rsc->flags);
> 
> If you are modifying this trace, it's better to following the leading 0x
> convention on all arguments rather than just the length.

I'd be concerned if anyone thought it a good idea to print out memory
addresses !0x.  The length is the only parameter there which could
(and has) cause confusion.

However, the fix-up is trivial, so I'm happy to oblige.  I'll leave
the final decision to Bjorn and fix-up if he sees it necessary.

> >>>  	carveout = kzalloc(sizeof(*carveout), GFP_KERNEL);
> >>> @@ -590,7 +590,8 @@ static int rproc_handle_carveout(struct rproc *rproc,
> >>>  
> >>>  	va = dma_alloc_coherent(dev->parent, rsc->len, &dma, GFP_KERNEL);
> >>>  	if (!va) {
> >>> -		dev_err(dev->parent, "dma_alloc_coherent err: %d\n", rsc->len);
> >>> +		dev_err(dev->parent,
> >>> +			"failed to allocate dma memory: len 0x%x\n", rsc->len);
> >>>  		ret = -ENOMEM;
> >>>  		goto free_carv;
> >>>  	}
> > 
> 

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