linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/ceph/io: make ceph_start_io

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: <CAKPOu+-6SfZWQTazTP_0ipnd=S0ONx8vxe070wYgakB-g_igDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 19:58:53 +0100
From: Max Kellermann <max.kellermann@...os.com>
To: Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@....com>
Cc: "ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org" <ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org>, Xiubo Li <xiubli@...hat.com>, 
	"idryomov@...il.com" <idryomov@...il.com>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Alex Markuze <amarkuze@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/ceph/io: make ceph_start_io_*() killable

On Fri, Dec 6, 2024 at 6:40 PM Viacheslav Dubeyko <Slava.Dubeyko@....com> wrote:
> Do we really need this comment (for __must_check)? It looks like not
> very informative. What do you think?

That's a question of taste. For my taste, such comments are (not
needed but) helpful; many similar comments exist in the Linux kernel.

> I am not completely sure that it really needs to request compiler to
> check that return value is processed. Do we really need to enforce it?

Yes, should definitely be enforced. Callers which don't check the
return value are 100% buggy.