linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] bnx2: remove deadcode in bnx2_init

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: <ad25cce1-108c-76b0-fd46-739603e87d1c@linux.dev>
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 16:30:50 +0000
From:   Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Maxim Korotkov <korotkov.maxim.s@...il.com>
Cc:     Rasesh Mody <rmody@...vell.com>, GR-Linux-NIC-Dev@...vell.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bnx2: remove deadcode in bnx2_init_cpus()

On 20/02/2023 08:31, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 06:22:25PM +0300, Maxim Korotkov wrote:
>> The load_cpu_fw function has no error return code
>> and always returns zero. Checking the value returned by
>> this function does not make sense.
>> As a result, bnx2_init_cpus() will also return only zero
>> Therefore, it will be safe to change the type of functions
>> to void and remove checking
>>
>> Found by Security Code and Linux Verification
>> Center (linuxtesting.org) with SVACE
>>
>> Fixes: 57579f7629a3 ("bnx2: Use request_firmware()")
>> Signed-off-by: Maxim Korotkov <korotkov.maxim.s@...il.com>
>> ---
>> changes v2:
>> - bnx2_init_cpu_fw() and bnx2_init_cpus() are void
>> - delete casts to void
>> - remove check of bnx2_init_cpus() in bnx2_init_chip()
>>
> 
> Thanks,
> Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com>

Not sure if it should go to -net, because it doesn't actually fix any
bug, more like refactoring which goes to -next, I believe.