linux-kernel - Re: usb: gadget: fsl: Fix a wrong judgment in fsl_udc

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:   Fri, 10 Apr 2020 10:30:11 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     Tang Bin <tangbin@...s.chinamobile.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Cc:     Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        Shengju Zhang <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: usb: gadget: fsl: Fix a wrong judgment in fsl_udc_probe()

> Hardware experiments show that the negative return value is not just "-EPROBE_DEFER".

How much will this specific error code influence our understanding
of the discussed software situation?


>>> +        ret = udc_controller->irq ? : -ENODEV;
>> Will it be clearer to specify values for all cases in such a conditional operator
>> (instead of leaving one case empty)?
>
> I don't know what you mean of "instead of leaving one case empty".

I suggest to reconsider also the proposed specification “… ? : …”.

Regards,
Markus