netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: caif: fix ineffective error check

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: <218c3915-46f1-75e0-1a9b-f8cdc1789108@cogentembedded.com>
Date:   Sun, 4 Dec 2016 00:05:46 +0300
From:   Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:     PanBian <bianpan2016@....com>,
        Dmitry Tarnyagin <dmitry.tarnyagin@...kless.no>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: caif: fix ineffective error check


On 12/03/2016 06:38 PM, Pan Bian wrote:

>>> In function caif_sktinit_module(), the check of the return value of
>>> sock_register() seems ineffective. This patch fixes it.
>>>
>>> Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=188751
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pan Bian <bianpan2016@....com>
>>> ---
>>> net/caif/caif_socket.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/caif/caif_socket.c b/net/caif/caif_socket.c
>>> index aa209b1..2a689a3 100644
>>> --- a/net/caif/caif_socket.c
>>> +++ b/net/caif/caif_socket.c
>>> @@ -1108,7 +1108,7 @@ static int caif_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol,
>>> static int __init caif_sktinit_module(void)
>>> {
>>> 	int err = sock_register(&caif_family_ops);
>>> -	if (!err)
>>> +	if (err)
>>> 		return err;
>>
>>    Why not just:
>>
>> 	return sock_register(&caif_family_ops);
>>
> 	Your solution looks much cleaner.
>
> 	But I am not really sure whether it is the author's intention to
> 	return 0 anyway. Do you have any idea?

    I don't think so, the error check seems to have a typo.

[...]

> Best regards,
> Pan

MBR, Sergei