netdev - pci_set_consistent_dma

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200805250843.47179.mitov@issp.bas.bg>
Date:	Sun, 25 May 2008 08:43:47 +0300
From:	Marin Mitov <mitov@...p.bas.bg>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: pci_set_consistent_dma_mask() question

Hi all,

In the file: Documentation/DMA-mapping.txt is written:

pci_set_consistent_dma_mask() will always be able to set the same or a
smaller mask as pci_set_dma_mask(). However for the rare case that a
device driver only uses consistent allocations, one would have to
check the return value from pci_set_consistent_dma_mask().

grep-ing drivers/net/* shows that in many drivers 
the return value of pci_set_consistent_dma_mask() is checked
in the path where pci_set_dma_mask() was already successfull.
Sure, this is during driver's initiallysation, so it is not time critical.

My question: Is it worth to remove the unnecessary checks?
I could prepare patches if you find it worthfull.

Best regards.

Marin Mitov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html