linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] spi: Replace -ENOTSUPP with -EOPNOTSUPP in op checking

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: <20231110053721.GG17433@black.fi.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Nov 2023 07:37:21 +0200
From:   Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
To:     AceLan Kao <acelan.kao@...onical.com>
Cc:     Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>,
        Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@...nel.org>,
        Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] spi: Replace -ENOTSUPP with -EOPNOTSUPP in op
 checking

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 05:43:02PM +0800, AceLan Kao wrote:
> From: "Chia-Lin Kao (AceLan)" <acelan.kao@...onical.com>
> 
> No functional changes are introduced by this patch; it's a code cleanup
> to use the correct error code.

Probably good to mention here that this affect only the "SPI MEM"
drivers and the core parts. Also you could explain here that the reaosn
for this is to make sure we use unified "operation not supported" return
code accross these.

Does some kernel-doc need updating as well to make sure the future
drivers will return the correct one if they do not support given
optional operations?

> Signed-off-by: Chia-Lin Kao (AceLan) <acelan.kao@...onical.com>
> 
> ---
> v5. distinguish -EOPNOTSUPP from -ENOTSUPP
> ---
>  drivers/mtd/nand/spi/core.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/spi/atmel-quadspi.c | 2 +-
>  drivers/spi/spi-ath79.c     | 2 +-
>  drivers/spi/spi-bcm-qspi.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/spi/spi-mem.c       | 6 +++---
>  drivers/spi/spi-npcm-fiu.c  | 2 +-
>  drivers/spi/spi-ti-qspi.c   | 4 ++--
>  drivers/spi/spi-wpcm-fiu.c  | 2 +-

I think you should include the SPI subsystem maintainer as well, at
least for visibility.