netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 03/13] net: wwan: t7xx: Add core components

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: <8b47678-7c66-e62f-e5b-442a1a14138e@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jan 2022 19:36:16 +0200 (EET)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Martinez, Ricardo" <ricardo.martinez@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, johannes@...solutions.net,
        ryazanov.s.a@...il.com, loic.poulain@...aro.org,
        m.chetan.kumar@...el.com, chandrashekar.devegowda@...el.com,
        linuxwwan@...el.com, chiranjeevi.rapolu@...ux.intel.com,
        haijun.liu@...iatek.com, amir.hanania@...el.com,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        dinesh.sharma@...el.com, eliot.lee@...el.com,
        moises.veleta@...el.com, pierre-louis.bossart@...el.com,
        muralidharan.sethuraman@...el.com, Soumya.Prakash.Mishra@...el.com,
        sreehari.kancharla@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 03/13] net: wwan: t7xx: Add core components

On Tue, 25 Jan 2022, Martinez, Ricardo wrote:

> On 1/24/2022 6:51 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Jan 2022, Ricardo Martinez wrote:

> > > +int t7xx_fsm_append_cmd(struct t7xx_fsm_ctl *ctl, enum t7xx_fsm_cmd_state
> > > cmd_id, unsigned int flag)
> > No callsite in this patch seems to care about the error code, is it ok?
> 
> Even though there's no recovery path (like retry) for t7xx_fsm_append_cmd()
> failures, it makes sense to
> 
> propagate the error instead of ignoring it, will add that in the next version.
> 
> > E.g.:
> > > +int t7xx_md_init(struct t7xx_pci_dev *t7xx_dev)
> > > +{
> > > ...
> > If this returns an error, does it mean init/probe stalls? Or is there
> > some backup to restart?
> An error here will cause probe to fail, there's no recovery path for this.

Just to clarify, I think you misunderstood what I meant as you cut the 
critical line out in the reply. ...I meant heare that if 
t7xx_fsm_append_cmd returns an error, it will not make the probe to fail 
but lead to probe stalling (which propagating the error you intend to do 
will nicely address).


-- 
 i.