linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from base/arch

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: <20170411104337.GP30804@e106622-lin>
Date:   Tue, 11 Apr 2017 11:43:37 +0100
From:   Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@....com>
To:     Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com, sudeep.holla@....com,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, catalin.marinas@....com,
        will.deacon@....com, morten.rasmussen@....com,
        dietmar.eggemann@....com, broonie@...nel.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/9] drivers: remove useless comment from
 base/arch_topology.c

On 10/04/17 17:33, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 03:02:14PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 10/04/17 14:51, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 02:18:22PM +0100, Juri Lelli wrote:
> > > > Printing out an error message when we failed to get the cpu device is
> > > > not helping anyone. Remove it.
> > > 
> > > (1) the subject line talks about removing a "comment" but you're
> > >     actually removing an error printk
> > > (2) I don't think it's "not helping anyone", although the description
> > >     above doesn't say _why_ - it's reporting the lack of a missing CPU
> > >     device that we expect to be present.  If it's not present, then
> > >     we're not going to end up with the cpu capacity attribute, and the
> > >     error message answers the "why is that sysfs file missing" question.
> > 
> > That's the same I was thinking when I put the error message there in the
> > first place. But, then Greg didn't seem to like it.
> 
> I don't think it was a case of "not liking it" - Greg asked what use it
> was.  Greg also pointed out the race with userspace.
> 

Right. I asked him for more information, since I wasn't able to
understand where the problem is.

> I think dropping this patch is the quickest way to move forward.
> 

OK, I'm also up for dropping it.

Best,

- Juri