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: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 18:24:50 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com> Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>, Archit Taneja <architt@...eaurora.org>, Krzysztof Witos <kwitos@...ence.com>, Rafal Ciepiela <rafalc@...ence.com>, Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>, Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] phy: Add configuration interface > > > +int phy_configure(struct phy *phy, enum phy_mode mode, > > > + union phy_configure_opts *opts) > > > +{ > > > + int ret; > > > + > > > + if (!phy) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + if (!phy->ops->configure) > > > + return 0; > > > > Shouldn't you report an error to the caller ? If a caller expects the PHY to > > be configurable, I would assume that silently ignoring the requested > > configuration won't work great. > > I'm not sure. I also expect a device having to interact with multiple > PHYs, some of them needing some configuration while some other do > not. In that scenario, returning 0 seems to be the right thing to do. You could return -EOPNOTSUPP. That is common in the network stack. The caller then has the information to decide if it should keep going, or return an error. Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists