linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] extcon: palmas: hide error messages if gpio returns -EPROBE

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]

Date:   Mon, 17 Feb 2020 21:25:32 +0100
From:   "H. Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>
To:     Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>
Cc:     MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org,
        kernel@...a-handheld.com, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] extcon: palmas: hide error messages if gpio returns -EPROBE_DEFER

Hi Ladis,

> Am 17.02.2020 um 21:19 schrieb Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>:
> 
> Hi Nikolaus,
> 
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 08:33:52PM +0100, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
>> Hi Ladis,
>> 
>>> Am 17.02.2020 um 20:07 schrieb Ladislav Michl <ladis@...ux-mips.org>:
>>> Linux kernel prints so many lines on bootup and only few of them are
>>> valuable. Lets improve it by printing error value to give a clue
>>> why it failed.
>> 
>> Hm. The upstream code does already print the error. This feature is not removed.
>> But it is also printing an error in the EPROBE_DEFER case as well, where it is
>> not needed or not an error.
> 
> It seems you missed I'm printing also error _value_.

Indeed.

Well, usually there is no error so adding the error number is not of much
use (except for debugging)... The most likely one seems to be -EPROBE_DEFER.

On the omap5 boards where I have seen the error message being printed they were
EPROBE_DEFER.

So your proposal changes the subject (which has a very small focus).

> The rest of discussion
> would need disassembly and I'll do it once I'll be waiting for yet another
> long run recompile.

:)

BR and thanks,
Nikolaus