linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 17/22] crypto: qce: Print a failure msg in case probe() fails

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:   Fri, 12 Nov 2021 12:42:48 +0200
From:   Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>
To:     Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     bhupesh.linux@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, agross@...nel.org,
        herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net,
        stephan@...hold.net, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/22] crypto: qce: Print a failure msg in case probe()
 fails

Hi Bhupesh,

On 11/10/21 12:59 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Print a failure message (dev_err) in case the qcom qce crypto
> driver probe() fails.
> 
> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Thara Gopinath <thara.gopinath@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@...aro.org>
> ---
>   drivers/crypto/qce/core.c | 1 +
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c b/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
> index 98784d63d78c..7c90401a2ef1 100644
> --- a/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
> @@ -280,6 +280,7 @@ static int qce_crypto_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>   err_mem_path_disable:
>   	icc_set_bw(qce->mem_path, 0, 0);
>   err:
> +	dev_err(dev, "%s failed : %d\n", __func__, ret);
>   	return ret;
>   }
>   
> 

in my opinion expressed earlier this change is not needed, but I'll recede,
if somebody thinks that the change is useful in any way.

--
Best wishes,
Vladimir