linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] misc/pvpanic: Make 'pvpanic

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:   Sat, 22 May 2021 12:57:21 +0200
From:   Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Mihai Carabas <mihai.carabas@...cle.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        pizhenwei@...edance.com, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com, linqiheng@...wei.com,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] misc/pvpanic: Make 'pvpanic_probe()' resource
 managed

Le 22/05/2021 à 12:09, Andy Shevchenko a écrit :
> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 1:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, May 22, 2021 at 9:56 AM Christophe JAILLET
>> <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:
> 
> Hmm... Couple of (minor) comments though.
> 
>>> Simplify code and turn 'pvpanic_probe()' into a managed resource version.
>>> This simplify callers that don't need to do some clean-up on error in the
> 
> simplifies
> errors
> 

Ok

>>> probe and on remove.
>>>
>>> Update pvpanic-mmio.c and pvpanic-pci.c accordingly.
>>>
>>> 'pvpanic_remove()' don't need to be exported anymore.
>>
>> LGTM, thanks!
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
>>> Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> ...
> 
>>> +static void pvpanic_remove(void *param)
>>>   {
>>>          struct pvpanic_instance *pi_cur, *pi_next;
>>> +       struct pvpanic_instance *pi = param;
> 
>>>          if (!pi)
>>>                  return;
> 
> Looking at this I'm wondering why it's not a dead code.
> 
Agreed.

I'll send a v3, but my turn to nitpick now:

    Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
    Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>

Which one, should I use?
I guess the later.

CJ