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, 20 Nov 2021 15:08:06 +0900
From:   Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>
To:     Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...il.com>,
        Baokun Li <libaokun1@...wei.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
        tj@...nel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     yebin10@...wei.com, yukuai3@...wei.com,
        Hulk Robot <hulkci@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 2/2] sata_fsl: fix warning in remove_proc_entry when
 rmmod sata_fsl

On 11/20/21 00:43, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_fsl.c b/drivers/ata/sata_fsl.c
>> index 30759fd1c3a2..011daac4a14e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ata/sata_fsl.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_fsl.c
>> @@ -1493,7 +1493,7 @@ static int sata_fsl_probe(struct platform_device *ofdev)
>>   	host_priv->ssr_base = ssr_base;
>>   	host_priv->csr_base = csr_base;
>>   
>> -	irq = irq_of_parse_and_map(ofdev->dev.of_node, 0);
>> +	irq = platform_get_irq(ofdev, 0);
>>   	if (!irq) {
> 
> 	if (irq < 0) {
> 
>     platform_get_irq() returns negative error codes, not 0 on failure.

Sergei,

By the way, the kdoc comment for platform_get_irq() says:

"Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure."

But irq	0 is valid, isn't it ? So shouldn't this be changed to something
like:

"Return: IRQ number on success, negative error number on failure."

-- 
Damien Le Moal
Western Digital Research

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ