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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 12:58:27 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr> To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>, pablo@...filter.org, kaber@...sh.net, kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, davem@...emloft.net, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr Subject: Re: question about xt_find_table_lock On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Florian Westphal wrote: > Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr> wrote: > > The function xt_find_table_lock defined in net/netfilter/x_tables.c is > > preceeded by a comment that says that it returns ERR_PTR() on error. But > > looking at the definition, I only see occurrences of return NULL and > > returns of pointers that have previously been dereferenced. Is it the > > code or the documentation that is incorrect? The call sites seem to be > > using IS_ERR_OR_NULL. Is there a plan to return ERR_PTR values in the > > future? > > It used to return ERR_PTR, see: > > commit 7926dbfa4bc14e27f4e18a6184a031a1c1e077dc > netfilter: don't use mutex_lock_interruptible() > > So the comment isn't correct anymore and callers could test vs NULL. Thanks for the quick feedback. julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists