netdev - Re: [PATCH] s390/ism: Add check for dma_set_max_seg_size in ism

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]

Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2024 22:50:18 -0700
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>
Cc: wintera@...ux.ibm.com, twinkler@...ux.ibm.com, hca@...ux.ibm.com,
	gor@...ux.ibm.com, agordeev@...ux.ibm.com,
	borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com, svens@...ux.ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	ubraun@...ux.ibm.com, sebott@...ux.ibm.com,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/ism: Add check for dma_set_max_seg_size in
 ism_probe()

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 04:12:15PM +0800, Ma Ke wrote:
> As the possible failure of the dma_set_max_seg_size(), we should better
> check the return value of the dma_set_max_seg_size().

As I told you last time these checks are stupid, and I asked you to
instead send a patch to remove the return value.

Each and every of those patches just makes that removal harder.
Please stop this now and I'll prepare the removal for the next
merge window.