linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] qspinlock: no need to check return value of debugfs

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: <20190123091016.GA15019@brain-police>
Date:   Wed, 23 Jan 2019 09:10:18 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] qspinlock: no need to check return value of
 debugfs_create functions

On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 04:21:43PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> When calling debugfs functions, there is no need to ever check the
> return value.  The function can work or not, but the code logic should
> never do something different based on this.
> 
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> ---
>  kernel/locking/qspinlock_stat.h | 18 ++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

Curious, but are you planning to make these functions return void after
you've modified all of the callers?

Will