linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Alchemy: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in alchemy_pci

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: <CAOLZvyH-DF_r77kzcVcn+A-tTov+aNZ1oGNQLnGWXE35UODqtQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 25 May 2017 08:20:33 +0200
From:   Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@...il.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     Linux-MIPS <linux-mips@...ux-mips.org>,
        Paul Burton <paul.burton@...tec.com>,
        Ralf Bächle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: Alchemy: Delete an error message for a failed
 memory allocation in alchemy_pci_probe()

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 8:15 PM, SF Markus Elfring
<elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>> +++ b/arch/mips/pci/pci-alchemy.c
>>> @@ -377,7 +377,6 @@ static int alchemy_pci_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>
>>>         ctx = kzalloc(sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>         if (!ctx) {
>>> -               dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no memory for pcictl context\n");
>>>                 ret = -ENOMEM;
>>>                 goto out;
>>>         }
>>> --
>>> 2.13.0
>>
>> Why are you removing just this one dev_err()?
>
> How do you think about to achieve a small code reduction also for this software module?

Generally speaking, sure.  But why remove just this one?  Is it
because it loosely follows a
pattern that was deemed removable in that slidedeck you linked to?
(the "usb_submit_urb()" part)?


>> What issue are you trying to address?
>
> Do you find information from a Linux allocation failure report sufficient
> for such a function implementation?

Yes, I wrote that code, and in case this driver doesn't load, I'd like
to know precisely where
initialization failed.  I can happily spare a few bytes for that.

Manuel