linux-kernel - Re: [alsa-devel] ALSA: pcsp: Use common error handling code in snd_card_pcsp

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: <b434f976-33a1-7ced-55b5-b55487f2fb14@users.sourceforge.net>
Date:   Tue, 22 Aug 2017 17:03:00 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [alsa-devel] ALSA: pcsp: Use common error handling code in
 snd_card_pcsp_probe()

>> * I find it a bit safer when the error predicate is “return value != 0”.
> 
> Can't agree.

How do you think about to reduce the probability that positive return values
will accidentally be interpreted as a successful function execution.

> And I have no interest to continue bike-shedding, sorry.

I do not like that you prefer to put this technical detail into such
a communication category.

> You can't convince me regarding this.

Would you still like to integrate the proposed refactoring with the use
of previous failure predicates then?

Regards,
Markus