linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2?] ALSA: scarlett2: Add error check after retrieving PEQ filter values

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: <988de26b-9522-47bb-b80b-a56bc5923109@web.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 10:17:15 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Zhu Jun <zhujun2@...s.chinamobile.com>, linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
 "Geoffrey D. Bennett" <g@...vu>, Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
 Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2?] ALSA: scarlett2: Add error check after retrieving PEQ
 filter values

> Add error check after retrieving PEQ filter values in scarlett2_update_filter_values
> that ensure function returns error if PEQ filter value retrieval fails

* It is usually preferred to end such a sentence with a dot, isn't it?

* Would you like to add any tags (like “Fixes” and “Cc”) accordingly?
  https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.12-rc2#n145

…
> ---
>  sound/usb/mixer_scarlett2.c | 3 +++

Please take version information better into account.

See also:
* https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.12-rc2#n321

* https://lore.kernel.org/all/?q=%22This+looks+like+a+new+version+of+a+previously+submitted+patch%22

…
> +++ b/sound/usb/mixer_scarlett2.c
> @@ -5614,6 +5614,9 @@ static int scarlett2_update_filter_values(struct usb_mixer_interface *mixer)
>  			SCARLETT2_BIQUAD_COEFFS,
>  		peq_flt_values);
>
> +	if (err < 0)
> +		return err;
> +
>  	for (i = 0, dst_idx = 0; i < info->dsp_input_count; i++) {
…

May a blank line be omitted before the return value check?

Regards,
Markus