linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/resource: return real error codes from walk failures

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: <CAErSpo5pAQs-SJRKc-ie15zpSqf9FsPWnHeSpggU-EeZDg=AYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Jan 2019 15:19:58 -0600
From:   Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
To:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>, zwisler@...nel.org,
        vishal.l.verma@...el.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, mhocko@...e.com,
        linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>, baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
        Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mm/resource: return real error codes from walk failures

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 3:10 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/25/19 1:02 PM, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> >> @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ int walk_system_ram_range(unsigned long
> >>         unsigned long flags;
> >>         struct resource res;
> >>         unsigned long pfn, end_pfn;
> >> -       int ret = -1;
> >> +       int ret = -EINVAL;
> > Can you either make a similar change to the powerpc version of
> > walk_system_ram_range() in arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c or explain why it's
> > not needed?  It *seems* like we'd want both versions of
> > walk_system_ram_range() to behave similarly in this respect.
>
> Sure.  A quick grep shows powerpc being the only other implementation.
> I'll just add this hunk:
>
> > diff -puN arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c~memory-hotplug-walk_system_ram_range-returns-neg-1 arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c
> > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c~memory-hotplug-walk_system_ram_range-returns-neg-1  2019-01-25 12:57:00.000004446 -0800
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/mem.c     2019-01-25 12:58:13.215004263 -0800
> > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ walk_system_ram_range(unsigned long star
> >         struct memblock_region *reg;
> >         unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages;
> >         unsigned long tstart, tend;
> > -       int ret = -1;
> > +       int ret = -EINVAL;
>
> I'll also dust off the ol' cross-compiler and make sure I didn't
> fat-finger anything.

Sounds good.  Then add my

Reviewed-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>