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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 09:57:00 +0100 From: SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> To: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: PCI: rcar: Use common error handling code in rcar_pcie_enable_msi() > This is fine by me Thanks for another bit of change acceptance. > except that the change in the name of the goto label seems spurious. I am curious if the popularity of a jump label like “err” will decrease (in the Linux source files) over time. > But if you really want to change it then as it is an error path > I should suggest it describe that its an error and what unwinding > is done, f.e. err_remove_domain. * Do you get such a kind of information only when the prefix “err_” is added to this identifier? * Do you prefer to stress the “domain removal” (or the shown error message) in the label? Regards, Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists