netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ath9k: Return an error when ath9k_hw

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: <87zho0uh0s.fsf@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Mon, 06 May 2019 11:24:51 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>
Cc:     Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>, ath9k-devel@....qualcomm.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: wireless: ath9k: Return an error when ath9k_hw_reset() fails

Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com> writes:

> On 04.05.2019 12:08, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>> ath9k_hw_reset() in ath9k_start() can fail, and in this case, 
>> ath9k_start() should return an error instead of executing the 
>> subsequent code.
>> 
> Such mechanical patches w/o understanding the code are always
> problematic. Do you have any proof that this error is fatal?
> I think it is not, else we wouldn't have this line:
> ah->reset_power_on = false;
> Also you should consider that a mutex and a spinlock are held.
> Maybe changing the error message to a warning would be more
> appropriate. But this I would leave to somebody being more
> familiar with this driver.

A very good point, thanks Heiner! I will drop this unless someone
familiar with ath9k says that this is ok.

-- 
Kalle Valo