linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] kthreads fixes for v6.14-rc2

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z6KJKul1JUIpHl0O@pavilion.home>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2025 22:39:54 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] kthreads fixes for v6.14-rc2

Le Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 11:06:57AM -0800, Linus Torvalds a écrit :
> On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 at 10:58, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > - Properly handle return value when allocation fails for the preferred
> >   affinity.
> 
> Well, we have exactly one caller of this function, and that caller
> doesn't actually care about the return value.
> 
> The function is literally the "preferred" affinity. If the affinity
> setup fails, it's harmless.
> 
> Anyway, the fix doesn't look wrong, and I've pulled it, but it's just
> all very harmless. I think the "set but not used" error could have
> been fixed by just removing the 'ret' variable entirely.

Right, I wanted to be able to reflect failure just in case but the
point of doing it is certainly debatable... Thanks for pulling it
anyway!