linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] device property: Clarify description on returned value in some functions

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: <Y+9ek6I0tCMHcHRQ@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2023 13:01:39 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>,
        Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Kaehn <kaehndan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] device property: Clarify description on returned
 value in some functions

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 12:27:53PM +0200, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 10:57:08PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

...

> >   * fwnode_get_next_child_node - Return the next child node handle for a node
> >   * @fwnode: Firmware node to find the next child node for.
> >   * @child: Handle to one of the node's child nodes or a %NULL handle.
> > + *
> > + * Caller is responsible to call fwnode_handle_put() on the returned fwnode
> > + * pointer.
> 
> The loop itself will also put the child node, so this is only relevant
> outside the loop.

Yes and this is exactly what people stumbled over. Hence this note.
This call per se doesn't loop, so I didn't get how your comment can
be transformed to anything here. Care to elaborate a bit more on
what I have to add here or reword?

...

> > + * Among other cases this has to be used when terminating device_for_each_child_node()
> 
> I don't think device_for_each_child_node() should be mentioned here. This
> isn't really related to that in particular.

Okay, I will drop this change. It's anyway out of the scope of this patch.

> With these:
> 
> Acked-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>

Thanks, but due to above I can't apply it right away.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko