linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] s390/ism: Add check for dma_set_max_seg_size in ism

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: <8a66afe4-5df8-4542-b74f-b050e71263fb@web.de>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 16:52:09 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Christian Bornträger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Gerd Bayer <gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, Niklas Schnelle
 <schnelle@...ux.ibm.com>, Stefan Raspl <raspl@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
 Thorsten Winkler <twinkler@...ux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik
 <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/ism: Add check for dma_set_max_seg_size in
 ism_probe()

> As the possible failure of the dma_set_max_seg_size(), we should better
> check the return value of the dma_set_max_seg_size().

Please avoid the repetition of a function name in such a change description.
Can it be improved with corresponding imperative wordings?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc5#n94

…
> +++ b/drivers/s390/net/ism_drv.c
> @@ -620,7 +620,9 @@ static int ism_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *id)
>  		goto err_resource;
>
>  	dma_set_seg_boundary(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M - 1);
> -	dma_set_max_seg_size(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M);
> +	ret = dma_set_max_seg_size(&pdev->dev, SZ_1M);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
>  	pci_set_master(pdev);
…

1. Will the shown dma_set_seg_boundary() call trigger similar software development concerns?
   https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc5/source/include/linux/dma-mapping.h#L562

2. Would the following statement be more appropriate for the proposed completion
   of the exception handling?

+		goto err_resource;

3. Under which circumstances would you become interested to increase the application
   of scope-based resource management here?
   https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc5/source/include/linux/cleanup.h#L8

Regards,
Markus