[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2024081314-parched-salary-ec68@gregkh>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2024 12:19:42 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: quic_zijuhu <quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@...el.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@...amocchi.jp>,
Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Zijun Hu <zijun_hu@...oud.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] driver core: Add simple parameter checks for APIs
device_(for_each|find)_child()
On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 06:00:30PM +0800, quic_zijuhu wrote:
> On 8/13/2024 5:44 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 08:18:07AM +0800, Zijun Hu wrote:
> >> From: Zijun Hu <quic_zijuhu@...cinc.com>
> >>
> >> Add simple parameter checks for APIs device_(for_each|find)_child() and
> >> device_for_each_child_reverse().
> >
> > Ok, but why? Who is calling this with NULL as a parent pointer?
> >
> > Remember, changelog text describes _why_ not just _what_ you are doing.
> >
>
> For question why ?
>
> The main purpose of this change is to make these APIs have *CONSISTENT*
> parameter checking (!parent || !parent->p)
>
> currently, 2 of them have checking (!parent->p), the other have checking
> (!parent), the are INCONSISTENT.
>
>
> For question who ?
> device_find_child() have had such checking (!parent), that maybe mean
> original author has concern that parent may be NULL.
>
> Moreover, these are core driver APIs, it is worthy checking input
> parameter strictly.
Not always, no, don't check for things that will not happen, otherwise
you are checking for no reason at all.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists