linux-kernel - Re: kernel/module: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in add_module

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Oct 2017 13:12:21 +0200
From:   SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
To:     Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel/module: Delete an error message for a failed memory
 allocation in add_module_usage()

>> This is a small allocation so it can't fail in current kernels.  I can't
>> imagine a situation where this could fail and it wasn't dead easy to
>> debug.  Most modules are loaded at boot so it's not likely to fail, but
>> if it did, it would be easy to reproduce.  If it's not loaded at boot
>> it's probably really easy to tell which module we're loading.
> 
> Yeah, good points. And on second thought, we normally don't print
> warnings for every small alloc failure in the kernel anyway (that
> would be utterly superfluous), the error code itself is sufficient.
> And in the module loader this seems to be the only printk out of the
> dozen alloc calls we do, so I'm OK with removing this one.

Thanks for your constructive feedback.

Can it help to improve the corresponding documentation for Linux
programming interfaces a bit more?

Regards,
Markus