linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] brcm80211: fmac: Add error handling for brcmf_usb_dl

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: <c8a78b36-6d24-42bd-b9aa-2a03cd7a01db@broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 13:33:04 +0200
From: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, vulab@...as.ac.cn,
 brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com, brcm80211@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
 Erick Archer <erick.archer@...look.com>, Jacobe Zang
 <jacobe.zang@...ion.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
 Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] brcm80211: fmac: Add error handling for
 brcmf_usb_dl_writeimage()



On 4/22/2025 12:43 PM, Markus Elfring wrote:
> …
>> brcmf_usb_dl_cmd() but dose not check its return value. The
> …
> 
> Please avoid typos in such a change description.

Please avoid such a stupid comment and just indicate what you think is 
wrong and give a proper suggestion to what is should be.

> 
>> Add error handling for brcmf_usb_dl_cmd() to jump to error
>> handling path if the brcmf_usb_dl_cmd() fails and the
>> 'state.state' and the 'state.bytes' are uninitialized.
> 
> This wording is improvable.

That is quite a generic wording you use there. Speak your mind and come 
up with improved feedback.

>> Improve the error message to report more detailed error
>> information.
> 
> Please offer such an adjustment by a separate update step.
> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.15-rc3#n81

Nah. The changes are small and within context. The patch is small enough 
to assure the bar is low enough for swift review. Splitting it up only 
increases the burden.

Regards,
Arend