netdev - Re: [PATCH 02/20] staging: wfx: add support for I/O access

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4024590.nSQgSsaaFe@pc-42>
Date:   Wed, 2 Oct 2019 16:29:09 +0000
From:   Jerome Pouiller <Jerome.Pouiller@...abs.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC:     "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Le Goff <David.Legoff@...abs.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/20] staging: wfx: add support for I/O access

On Thursday 19 September 2019 18:34:48 CEST Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 10:52:35AM +0000, Jerome Pouiller wrote:
> > +static int wfx_sdio_copy_from_io(void *priv, unsigned int reg_id,
> > +                              void *dst, size_t count)
> > +{
> > +     struct wfx_sdio_priv *bus = priv;
> > +     unsigned int sdio_addr = reg_id << 2;
> > +     int ret;
> > +
> > +     BUG_ON(reg_id > 7);
> 
> Hi Jerome
> 
> BUG_ON should only be used when the system is corrupted, and there is
> no alternative than to stop the machine, so it does not further
> corrupt itself. Accessing a register which does not exist is not a
> reason the kill the machine. A WARN() and a return of -EINVAL would be
> better.

Hi Andrew,

I did not forget your suggestion. However, if everyone is agree with that, I'd 
prefer to address it in a next pull request. Indeed, I'd prefer to keep this 
version in sync with version 2.3.1 published on github.

-- 
Jérôme Pouiller