linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix error return code in sd_read_ext

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: <d9d44a9c-e61e-2803-731b-cfa5f3d3d46c@huawei.com>
Date:   Wed, 30 Nov 2022 19:18:05 +0800
From:   "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC:     <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Fix error return code in sd_read_ext_regs()



On 2022/11/30 18:04, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 at 10:29, Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fix to return a negative error code from the error handling
>> case instead of 0, as done elsewhere in this function.
>>
>> Fixes: c784f92769ae ("mmc: core: Read the SD function extension registers for power management")
>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/mmc/core/sd.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
>> index 3662bf5320ce56d..7b64f76f0179ca8 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
>> @@ -1277,6 +1277,7 @@ static int sd_read_ext_regs(struct mmc_card *card)
>>         if (rev != 0 || len > 512) {
>>                 pr_warn("%s: non-supported SD ext reg layout\n",
>>                         mmc_hostname(card->host));
>> +               err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> 
> The original intent was to not return an error code. Simply, because
> the card remains functional and all but the new features from the SD
> function extensions registers can still be used.

OK, I got it.

> 
> Perhaps, we should update the comment a few lines above to better
> reflect that this is in-fact what we intend here.

How about also add 'warning' to the output? The other two outputs
contain the 'error' keyword.

> 
>>                 goto out;
>>         }
>>
> 
> Kind regards
> Uffe
> .
> 

-- 
Regards,
  Zhen Lei