netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 7/9] net: phy: enable qoriq backplane support

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]

Date:   Thu, 26 Mar 2020 13:27:26 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc:     florinel.iordache@....com, davem@...emloft.net,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, f.fainelli@...il.com, hkallweit1@...il.com,
        linux@...linux.org.uk, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, kuba@...nel.org, corbet@....net,
        shawnguo@...nel.org, leoyang.li@....com, madalin.bucur@....nxp.com,
        ioana.ciornei@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 7/9] net: phy: enable qoriq backplane support

On Thu, 2020-03-26 at 21:13 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > +static int qoriq_backplane_config_init(struct phy_device *bpphy)
> > > +{
> > []
> > > +	for (i = 0; i < bp_phy->num_lanes; i++) {
> > []
> > > +		ret = of_address_to_resource(lane_node, 0, &res);
> > > +		if (ret) {
> > > +			bpdev_err(bpphy,
> > > +				  "could not obtain lane memory map for index=%d, ret = %d\n",
> > > +				  i, ret);
> > > +			return ret;
> > 
> > This could use the new vsprintf %pe extension:
> 
> Hi Joe

Hello Andrew.

> Probably a FAQ. But is there plans to extend vsprintf to take an int
> errno value, rather than having to do this ugly ERR_PTR(ret) every
> time? Format string %de ?

Uwe Kleine-König proposed one a couple times.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/27/1456

Though I believe one %<type><extra> extension mechanism
in vsprintf is enough.  At least the %p<foo> use is
unlikely to ever have desired but dropped output after
an output of %p.  It seems less true for %[diux].