linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Fix wrong comment

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: <CAHp75VcMf05FWJU+1tRvO8NrXhrw-CyG6Bi0wY73We3dDPdKJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 25 Dec 2021 18:53:24 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@...as.ac.cn>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: platform: Fix wrong comment

On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 6:50 PM Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 12/25/21 08:47, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 25, 2021 at 2:02 AM Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@...as.ac.cn> wrote:
> >>
> >> I notice that there is a 'WARN(ret == 0, "0 is an invalid IRQ
> >> number\n");' before 'return ret;', which means that it is possible to
> >> return 0 if fails.
> >> Therefore, it might be better to correct the wrong comment.
> >> And also there is reply sent by Damien Le Moal because I submitted a
> >> patch to remove the non-zero check of the platform_get_irq() previously.
> >> Damien Le Moal said that the comment for platform_get_irq() is wrond
> >> because it can actually return 0.
> >> Moreover, platform_get_irq() returns platform_get_irq_optional().
> >> As a conclusion, the comments of the platform_get_irq() and
> >> platform_get_irq_optional() should be fixed.
> >> Not only that, the comments of platform_get_irq_byname() and
> >> platform_get_irq_byname_optional() have the same error.
> >> This time I only submit one as an example.
> >> If the patch is right, I will submit another version to fix all.
> >> But, I also notice that the 'return 0' is removed intentionally in the
> >> fixed tag.
> >> I am not sure which one is right.
> >> Anyway, the success IRQ number should be 'postive' other than
> >> 'non-zero'.
> >> So the comment should be corrected.
> >> Here is the mail from Damien Le Moal.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >> Fixes: c2f3f755f5c7 ("Revert "driver core: platform: Make platform_get_irq_optional() optional"")
> >
> > How can it be a Revert?
>
> That's the "title" of that commit:
>
> commit c2f3f755f5c7
> Author: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Date:   Wed Apr 7 11:47:56 2021 +0200
>
>     Revert "driver core: platform: Make platform_get_irq_optional() optional"

My point is that the proposed change should fix a revert, how come?


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko