linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers: scsi: megaraid: Add missing check for dma_set

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]

Message-ID: <e751f992-0510-478e-a714-6299e8650333@web.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 14:12:33 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Haoxiang Li <make24@...as.ac.cn>, megaraidlinux.pdl@...adcom.com,
 linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
 Chandrakanth patil <chandrakanth.patil@...adcom.com>,
 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
 Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@...adcom.com>,
 "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
 Shivasharan Srikanteshwara <shivasharan.srikanteshwara@...adcom.com>,
 Sumit Saxena <sumit.saxena@...adcom.com>, Suraj Upadhyay <usuraj35@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: scsi: megaraid: Add missing check for
 dma_set_mask

> pdev->dev cannot perform DMA properly if dma_set_mask() returns non-zero.

Can a wording approach (like the following) become a part of a better change description?

  Direct memory access can not be properly performed any more
  after a dma_set_mask() call failed.

> Add check for dma_set_mask()

How do you think about to avoid a repeated reference to a function name?

>                                  return the error if it fails.

How can this happen after you did not store the return value (in the local variable “error”)
for further usage (according to your proposed source code adjustment)?

…
> Signed-off-by: Haoxiang Li <make24@...as.ac.cn>

I find it interesting that another personal name is presented here.
I noticed that some patches were published with the name “Ma Ke” previously.
How will requirements be resolved for the Developer's Certificate of Origin?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.10-rc6#n398

How do you think about to use a summary phrase like “Complete error handling
in megaraid_probe_one()”?

Regards,
Markus