netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] udp_tunnel: Fix typo using netdev_WARN instead of netdev

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: <20250904091832.GC372207@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 10:18:32 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>
Cc: dsahern@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] udp_tunnel: Fix typo using netdev_WARN instead
 of netdev_warn

On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 12:57:12PM -0700, Alok Tiwari wrote:
> There is no condition being tested, so it should be netdev_warn,
> not netdev_WARN. Using netdev_WARN here is a typo or misuse.

Hi Alok,

I agree that using netdev_warn() seems more appropriate.

But doesn't the difference between netdev_warn() and netdev_WARN()
lie in the output they produce rather than testing of a condition
(or not)?

> 
> Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>

...