linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/15] staging: exfat: Clean up return codes

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: <db3315695d3ea493e05f63f3b21fb3a1482293fd.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Oct 2019 09:23:24 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Valdis Kletnieks <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/15] staging: exfat: Clean up return codes

On Thu, 2019-10-24 at 11:53 -0400, Valdis Kletnieks wrote:
> The code had its own non-standard FFS_FOO return codes. Go through
> and convert them all the kernel standard -EFOO codes.
> 
> Valdis Kletnieks (15):
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_FULL
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_NOTFOUND
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_DIRBUSY
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_PERMISSIONERR
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_NAMETOOLONG
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_FILEEXIST
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_INVALIDPATH
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return code - FFS_MEMORYERR
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_FORMATERR
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_MEDIAERR
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_EOF
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_INVALIDFID
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_ERROR
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - remove unused codes
>   staging: exfat: Clean up return codes - FFS_SUCCESS

All well and good, but does converting the error code from
positive to negative have any impact on any of the code
paths that use these return values?

	if (error > 0)
vs
	if (error < 0)

?

If you've gone through all the return tests,
then it would be nice to say so.