netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx5: remove NULL check before dev

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:   Wed, 30 Nov 2022 21:13:16 +0200
From:   Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     zhang.songyi@....com.cn, saeedm@...dia.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, mbloch@...dia.com,
        maorg@...dia.com, elic@...dia.com, jerrliu@...dia.com,
        cmi@...dia.com, vladbu@...dia.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx5: remove NULL check before dev_{put,
 hold}

On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 09:25:16AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2022 11:00:34 +0200 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 03:41:27PM +0800, zhang.songyi@....com.cn wrote:
> > > From: zhang songyi <zhang.songyi@....com.cn>
> > > 
> > > The call netdev_{put, hold} of dev_{put, hold} will check NULL,
> > > so there is no need to check before using dev_{put, hold}.
> > > 
> > > Fix the following coccicheck warning:
> > > /drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/lag.c:1450:2-10:
> > > WARNING:
> > > WARNING  NULL check before dev_{put, hold} functions is not needed.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: zhang songyi <zhang.songyi@....com.cn>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/lag/lag.c | 3 +--
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)  
> > 
> > Please change all places in mlx5 in one patch.
> 
> Your call as a mlx5 maintainer, but I'd say don't change them at all.

I'm fine with one patch per-driver, I'm not fine with one patch per-line :).

> All these trivial patches are such a damn waste of time.

IMHO, it is valuable changes for actively developed code.

Thanks