linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] iio: adc: ad7124: use guard(mutex) to simplify return paths

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: <aMRhfvi88aoWRZao@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 21:07:58 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
	Michael Hennerich <Michael.Hennerich@...log.com>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
	Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] iio: adc: ad7124: use guard(mutex) to simplify
 return paths

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 12:41:08PM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> On 9/12/25 12:15 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 09:19:36AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> >> On 9/11/25 11:39 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 12:42 AM David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Use guard(mutex) in a couple of functions to allow direct returns. This
> >>>> simplifies the code a bit and will make later changes easier.
> >>>
> >>> From this and the patch it's unclear if cleanup.h was already there or
> >>> not. If not, this patch misses it, if yes, the commit message should
> >>> be different.
> >>
> >> cleanup.h is already there. I'm not sure what would need to be different
> >> in the commit message though.
> > 
> > I expect something like "finish converting the driver to use guard()()..."
> 
> cleanup.h was previously included for __free(), so the guard() stuff
> is all new.

Okay, then something like "Cover the lock handling using guard()()..."
The point I'm trying to make is that "Use $FOO API/etc" without new header
being included either:
1) missing inclusion (proxying);
2) start using of a new API from the library/header that we already use for
another API, but without mentioning that.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko