linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 4/7] net: ipa: ipa

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: <YHP2IKZ7pB+l4a6O@unreal>
Date:   Mon, 12 Apr 2021 10:26:24 +0300
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        evgreen@...omium.org, cpratapa@...eaurora.org,
        subashab@...eaurora.org, elder@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 4/7] net: ipa: ipa_stop() does not return an
 error

On Sun, Apr 11, 2021 at 08:42:15AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> On 4/11/21 8:28 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> >> I think *not* checking an available return value is questionable
> >> practice.  I'd really rather have a build option for a
> >> "__need_not_check" tag and have "must_check" be the default.
> > __need_not_check == void ???
> 
> I'm not sure I understand your statement here, but...

We are talking about the same thing. My point was that __need_not_check
is actually void. The API author was supposed to declare that by
declaring that function doesn't return anything.

Thanks