netdev - Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] net: ethernet: ti: Remove IS_ERR_OR_NULL checks for knav_dma_open

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: <aN1Pwh3B8xhEoQmh@horms.kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 16:58:58 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Cc: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
	Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...libre.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <ssantosh@...nel.org>,
	Siddharth Vadapalli <s-vadapalli@...com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/3] net: ethernet: ti: Remove IS_ERR_OR_NULL checks
 for knav_dma_open_channel

On Wed, Oct 01, 2025 at 05:54:16AM -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 16:59-20250930, Jacob Keller wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 9/30/2025 5:16 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > > knav_dma_open_channel now only returns NULL on failure instead of error
> > > pointers. Replace IS_ERR_OR_NULL checks with simple NULL checks.
> > > 
> > > Suggested-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
> > > ---
> > > Changes in V2:
> > > * renewed version
> > > * Dropped the fixes since code refactoring was involved.
> > > 
> > 
> > Whats the justification for splitting this apart from patch 1 of 3?
> > 
> > It seems like we ought to just do all this in a single patch. I don't
> > see the value in splitting this apart into 3 patches, unless someone
> > else on the list thinks it is valuable.
> 
> The only reason I have done that is to ensure the patches are
> bisectable. at patch #1, we are still returning -EINVAL, the driver
> should still function when we switch the return over to NULL.

Maybe we can simplify things and squash all three patches into one.
They seem inter-related.