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: <4a5a5b1c-080a-327a-1e2f-dc087948e1a1@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 3 Oct 2020 17:06:42 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>, thierry.reding@...il.com,
        joro@...tes.org
Cc:     vdumpa@...dia.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] iommu/tegra-smmu: Rework tegra_smmu_probe_device()

03.10.2020 09:59, Nicolin Chen пишет:
>  static int tegra_smmu_of_xlate(struct device *dev,
>  			       struct of_phandle_args *args)
>  {
> +	struct platform_device *iommu_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(args->np);
> +	struct tegra_mc *mc = platform_get_drvdata(iommu_pdev);
>  	u32 id = args->args[0];
>  
> +	put_device(&iommu_pdev->dev);
> +
> +	if (!mc || !mc->smmu)
> +		return -EPROBE_DEFER;

I'm not very excited by seeing code in the patches that can't be
explained by the patch authors and will appreciate if you could provide
a detailed explanation about why this NULL checking is needed because I
think it is unneeded, especially given that other IOMMU drivers don't
have such check.

I'm asking this question second time now, please don't ignore review
comments next time.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ