linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] EDAC/dmc520: Don't print an error for each unconfigured interrupt line

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]

Message-ID: <20220418213453.GB31854@sequoia>
Date:   Mon, 18 Apr 2022 16:34:53 -0500
From:   Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Lei Wang <lewan@...rosoft.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Sinan Kaya <okaya@...nel.org>,
        Shiping Ji <shiping.linux@...il.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC/dmc520: Don't print an error for each unconfigured
 interrupt line

On 2022-04-18 23:13:36, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 03:40:29PM -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote:
> > > The API argument seems to have fizzled out in v2:
> > > 
> > >  https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220212201631.12648-1-s.shtylyov@omp.ru/
> 
> I don't see those two upstream yet, on a quick glance. Perhaps in Greg's tree?
> 
> Greg, what's the latest with that platform_get_*_optional() fun?
> 
> Also, the second of those two patches above has:
> 
> + * Return: non-zero IRQ number on success, 0 if IRQ wasn't found, negative error
> + * number on failure.
>   */
>  int platform_get_irq_byname_optional(struct platform_device *dev,
> 
> and your patch does:
> 
> +		irq = platform_get_irq_byname_optional(pdev, dmc520_irq_configs[idx].name);
>  		irqs[idx] = irq;
> 
> so on failure, it would still write the negative error value in
> irqs[idx].
> 
> How can that be right?

The patches to modify the API have become stale. There have been no
new comments or revisions since Feb. What I'm proposing is to proceed
with merging this simple fix and let the folks discussing the API
changes adjust the use in the dmc250 driver if/when they decide to
revive the API changes.

Tyler

> 
> -- 
> Regards/Gruss,
>     Boris.
> 
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
>