linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usbtmc: don't return zero on failure path in usbtmc

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170318085459.GA11134@localhost>
Date:   Sat, 18 Mar 2017 09:54:59 +0100
From:   Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To:     Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa-dev@...g-engineering.com>,
        Dave Penkler <dpenkler@...il.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ldv-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usbtmc: don't return zero on failure path in
 usbtmc_probe()

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 02:38:00AM +0300, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> usbtmc_probe() returns zero in case of allocation failures.
> 
> The patch fixes that. By the way it rearranges error lables just to improve
> readability of quite complex dependencies in error handling code.

This was in fact fixed earlier this week by commit 2e47c53503eb ("USB:
usbtmc: fix probe error path") in Greg's usb-linus branch.

The current error label is indeed confusingly named, but that can be
addressed by a follow-on clean-up patch. Note that naming error labels
after what they do (e.g. err_remove_capability) is generally preferred.

Thanks,
Johan