linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] driver core: switch to use dev_err

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: <8a7afe46-1720-67c7-0068-0d80f0ec3f50@huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 Aug 2022 14:35:52 +0800
From:   Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <rafael@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] driver core: switch to use dev_err_probe()


On 2022/8/22 14:09, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 10:10:22AM +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2022/8/19 17:42, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 05:46:56PM +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote:
>>>> Use dev_err_probe() to simplify code and print error code.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    drivers/base/core.c | 8 +++-----
>>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
>>>> index 753e7cca0f40..e51a09f9d0ec 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/base/core.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/base/core.c
>>>> @@ -2507,11 +2507,9 @@ static ssize_t uevent_store(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
>>>>    	int rc;
>>>>    	rc = kobject_synth_uevent(&dev->kobj, buf, count);
>>>> -
>>>> -	if (rc) {
>>>> -		dev_err(dev, "uevent: failed to send synthetic uevent\n");
>>>> -		return rc;
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	if (rc)
>>>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, rc,
>>>> +				     "uevent: failed to send synthetic uevent\n");
>>> I do not understand this at all, this is not on the probe path at all,
>>> so why is this function needed?
>>>
>>> Have you tested this?  What was the resulting output before and after
>>> this change?
>> Yes, after this change, the error code will be print.
> You did not answer my question.
>
> Again, this is not on the probe() callback path, so why are you wanting
> to call dev_err_probe()?
I was trying to simplify the code, I think I misuse the helper, you can 
ignore this patch.

Thanks,
Yang
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
> .