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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <YtgYuPrO6gw0nR3b@shredder> Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2022 18:01:12 +0300 From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, petrm@...dia.com, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, mlxsw@...dia.com, saeedm@...dia.com, snelson@...sando.io Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 05/12] mlxsw: core_linecards: Expose HW revision and INI version On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 04:59:03PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 02:43:17PM CEST, idosch@...dia.com wrote: > >On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 02:27:40PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 10:56:35AM CEST, idosch@...dia.com wrote: > >> >On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 08:48:40AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: > >> >> +int mlxsw_linecard_devlink_info_get(struct mlxsw_linecard *linecard, > >> >> + struct devlink_info_req *req, > >> >> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) > >> >> +{ > >> >> + char buf[32]; > >> >> + int err; > >> >> + > >> >> + mutex_lock(&linecard->lock); > >> >> + if (WARN_ON(!linecard->provisioned)) { > >> >> + err = 0; > >> > > >> >Why not: > >> > > >> >err = -EINVAL; > >> > > >> >? > >> > >> Well, a) this should not happen. No need to push error to the user for > >> this as the rest of the info message is still fine. > > > >Not sure what you mean by "the rest of the info message is still fine". > >Which info message? If the line card is not provisioned, then it > >shouldn't even have a devlink instance and it will not appear in > >"devlink dev info" dump. > > > >I still do not understand why this error is severe enough to print a > >WARNING to the kernel log, but not emit an error code to user space. > > As I wrote, WARN_ON was a leftover. It was a leftover in patch #10 where you checked '!linecard->ready'. Here I think it's actually correct because it shouldn't happen unless I'm missing something
Powered by blists - more mailing lists