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]
Date:   Mon, 12 Dec 2022 09:51:35 -0800
From:   Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "Loktionov, Aleksandr" <aleksandr.loktionov@...el.com>,
        Jan Sokolowski <jan.sokolowski@...el.com>,
        <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martin Liska <mliska@...e.cz>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i40e (gcc13): synchronize allocate/free functions return
 type & values

On 12/12/2022 3:55 AM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 04. 11. 22, 21:28, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/4/2022 11:47 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Fri, 4 Nov 2022 11:33:07 -0700 Tony Nguyen wrote:
>>>> As Jiri mentioned, this is propagated up throughout the driver. We 
>>>> could
>>>> change this function to return int but all the callers would then need
>>>> to convert these errors to i40e_status to propagate. This doesn't 
>>>> really
>>>> gain much other than having this function return int. To adjust the
>>>> entire call chain is going to take more work. As this is resolving a
>>>> valid warning and returning what is currently expected, what are your
>>>> thoughts on taking this now to resolve the issue and our i40e team will
>>>> take the work on to convert the functions to use the standard errnos?
>>>
>>> My thoughts on your OS abstraction layers should be pretty evident.
>>> If anything I'd like to be more vigilant about less flagrant cases.
>>>
>>> I don't think this is particularly difficult, let's patch it up
>>> best we can without letting the "status" usage grow.
>>
>> Ok thanks will do.
> 
> Just heads-up: have you managed to remove the abstraction yet?


Hi Jiri,

It's being worked on: 
https://lore.kernel.org/intel-wired-lan/20221207144800.1257060-1-jan.sokolowski@intel.com/

Thanks,
Tony

Powered by blists - more mailing lists