linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: make rtw_deinit_intf

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAA=Fs0=wWdTXgxg9dOm-UBG7VEtmiTOZXfboK5bt0pZvTVVG5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 23 Aug 2021 23:26:11 +0100
From:   Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
To:     Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
Cc:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
        "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: make rtw_deinit_intf_priv return void

On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 at 22:29, Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 8/24/21 12:20 AM, Phillip Potter wrote:
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 at 19:41, Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> rtw_deinit_intf_priv() always return success, so there is no need in
> >> return value
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/usb_intf.c | 5 +----
> >>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/usb_intf.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/usb_intf.c
> >> index e002070f7fba..37694aa96d13 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/usb_intf.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/os_dep/usb_intf.c
> >> @@ -129,13 +129,10 @@ static u8 rtw_init_intf_priv(struct dvobj_priv *dvobj)
> >>         return rst;
> >>  }
> >>
> >> -static u8 rtw_deinit_intf_priv(struct dvobj_priv *dvobj)
> >> +static void rtw_deinit_intf_priv(struct dvobj_priv *dvobj)
> >>  {
> >> -       u8 rst = _SUCCESS;
> >> -
> >>         kfree(dvobj->usb_alloc_vendor_req_buf);
> >>         _rtw_mutex_free(&dvobj->usb_vendor_req_mutex);
> >> -       return rst;
> >>  }
> >>
> >>  static struct dvobj_priv *usb_dvobj_init(struct usb_interface *usb_intf)
> >> --
> >> 2.32.0
> >>
> >
> > Dear Pavel,
> >
> > Looks good - going to test your RFC series now btw.
> >
>
> Thank you, Phillip!
>
>
> Testing this RFC is very important. If it's all ok with it, I am going
> to add proper error handling all across the driver code, based on read()
> errors :)
>
> Btw, we also can add error handling for write() operations, but I think
> it's not _very_ important, since driver won't misbehave in case of write
> failures
>
>
>
> With regards,
> Pavel Skripkin

Sorry, it also occurred to me after sending it would be better to have
mentioned this as a reply to that patch series rather than to this
e-mail. Apologies if I've confused anyone. Anyhow, I shall report my
findings on that e-mail thread.

Regards,
Phil