linux-kernel - Re: mfd: asic3: Add error checking return in asic3_mfd

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: <20200420085058.GA3612@dell>
Date:   Mon, 20 Apr 2020 09:50:58 +0100
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc:     Tang Bin <tangbin@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        Shengju Zhang <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: mfd: asic3: Add error checking return in asic3_mfd_probe()

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:

> >>> And remove the redundant 'ret = 0'.
> >>
> >> I propose to reconsider this interpretation of the source code here.
> >> How do you think about to move the mentioned statement into an else branch
> >> at the end?
> >
> > Could you please fix your mailer.
> 
> Would you like to help with increasing software development resources
> according to corresponding open issues?

You mean, do I want to contribute to fixing your mailer?

No, not really. :)

>mailto:tangbin%40cmss.chinamobile.com?In-Reply-To=%3C20200419091923.5728-1-tangbin@...s.chinamobile.com%3E&Cc=lee.jones%40linaro.org%2Clinux-kernel%40vger.kernel.org%2Czhangshengju%40cmss.chinamobile.com&Subject=Re%3A%20%5BPATCH%5D%20mfd%3A%20asic3%3A%20Add%20error%20checking%20return%20in%20asic3_mfd_probe%28%29

?

> Can any more clarification help also around the previous update suggestion
> “mfd: asic3: Delete redundant variable definition”?
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200403042020.17452-1-tangbin@cmss.chinamobile.com/
> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1219914/
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/3/4

Reviews for these patches are on my TODO.

So, it seems this mail did the right thing.  Did you use a different
mailer, or fix/configure your previous one?

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog