netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/8] af_packet: Check return of dev_set

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: <485B123E.3020501@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:13:18 +0800
From:	Wang Chen <wangchen@...fujitsu.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/8] af_packet: Check return of dev_set_promiscuity/allmulti

David Miller said the following on 2008-6-20 10:05:
> From: Wang Chen <wangchen@...fujitsu.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 08:54:32 +0800
> 
>> @@ -1245,7 +1247,8 @@ static int packet_mc_add(struct sock *sk, struct packet_mreq_max *mreq)
>>  	i->count = 1;
>>  	i->next = po->mclist;
>>  	po->mclist = i;
>> -	packet_dev_mc(dev, i, +1);
>> +	/* Positive increment should be checked for overflow --WCN */
>> +	err = packet_dev_mc(dev, i, 1);
>>  
> 
> Please don't add these little signatures to comments.  That might have
> been useful to do 10 years ago when we didn't use proper source
> control, but now we do and anyone interested can do a "git blame"
> to see who added that comment and why.
> 
> Also, this comment doesn't really add any information.  We check
> error return values simply because errors can happen, that's just
> a straight fact.  If packet_dev_mc() and it's sub calls can error
> for other reasons this comment is only telling part of the story
> and as a result becomes inaccurate.
> 
> Therefore, I'd like to ask that you not add this comment, it doesn't
> really help anything.  This kind of information can go into the
> commit log message.  That's where "why" information tends to belong.
> 

Roger.
I will remove all useless comment in my patch series.
Thanks David.
Don't blame me in every patch :)

--
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