linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/40] staging: rtl8723bs: replace RT_TRACE with public printk wrappers in core/rtw

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: <20210331101658.GK2065@kadam>
Date:   Wed, 31 Mar 2021 13:16:58 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Fabio Aiuto <fabioaiuto83@...il.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, joe@...ches.com,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/40] staging: rtl8723bs: replace RT_TRACE with public
 printk wrappers in core/rtw_xmit.c

I'm sorry but we can't accept this patch.

> @@ -481,12 +481,13 @@ static s32 update_attrib_sec_info(struct adapter *padapter, struct pkt_attrib *p
>  	pattrib->mac_id = psta->mac_id;
>  
>  	if (psta->ieee8021x_blocked == true) {
> -		RT_TRACE(_module_rtl871x_xmit_c_, _drv_err_, ("\n psta->ieee8021x_blocked == true\n"));
> +		pr_err("%s psta->ieee8021x_blocked == true\n", DRIVER_PREFIX);

Here we have change debug code that's never printed into an error
message.

A bunch of the rest are technically "wrong" but harmless.

>  	if (!pxmitpriv->pallocated_frame_buf) {
>  		pxmitpriv->pxmit_frame_buf = NULL;
> -		RT_TRACE(_module_rtl871x_xmit_c_, _drv_err_, ("alloc xmit_frame fail!\n"));
> +		pr_err("%s alloc xmit_frame fail!\n", DRIVER_PREFIX);

We don't print warning messages for allocation failures.  Checkpatch
is supposed to complain.

I always encourage people to think about everything deeply and look at
the context and read the error messages.  But if you send a patch which
mindlessly deletes all these RT_TRACE() messages, then we will apply
that.

It's unfortunate that you have to re-write the first patch in a 40
patch series.  :/

regards,
dan carpenter