linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] driver:core: no need to invert the return value of the call_driver

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: <2024070904-blob-unvarying-715f@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 16:24:31 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Lizhe <sensor1010@....com>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] driver:core: no need to invert the return value of
 the call_driver_probe()

On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 07:14:17AM -0700, Lizhe wrote:
> In the probe function (either drv->bus->probe() or drv->probe()),
> there is no return value of EPROBE_DEFER. the error return from probe
> should be -EPROBE_DEFER, hence no negation of call_driver_probe()'s
> return is needed, nor should there be an EPROBE_DEFER check in
> driver_probe_device()
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lizhe <sensor1010@....com>
> 
> v3:
> 	Modify commit message and versions go below the ---
> v2:
> 	Delete the judgment with the return value of EPROBEDEFER
> 	from the _driver_probe.device()
> v1:
> 	Add the judgment with the return value of EPROBEDEFER
> 	from the _driver_probe.device()
> ---
>  drivers/base/dd.c | 7 +------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

The documentation says to put the vN: stuff below the --- line, right?

And how did you find this issue?

thanks,

greg kh-