Re: [PATCH] usb: hso: check for return value in hso_serial_common_create()

Re: [PATCH] usb: hso: check for return value in hso_serial_common_create()

[Markus Elfring]

> in case of an error tty_register_device_attr() returns ERR_PTR(),
> add IS_ERR() check

I suggest to improve this change description a bit.

Will the tag “Fixes” become helpful for the commit message?


…
> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/hso.c
…
> @@ -2311,6 +2313,7 @@  static int hso_serial_common_create(struct hso_serial *serial, int num_urbs,
>  	return 0;
>  exit:
>  	hso_serial_tty_unregister(serial);
> +exit2:
>  	hso_serial_common_free(serial);
>  	return -1;
>  }

Can other labels (like “unregister_serial” and “free_serial”) be preferred here?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id=92ed301919932f777713b9172e525674157e983d#n485

Regards,
Markus

Re: [PATCH] usb: hso: check for return value in hso_serial_common_create()

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1254", Size: 1657 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 03:19:00PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > in case of an error tty_register_device_attr() returns ERR_PTR(),
> > add IS_ERR() check
> 
> I suggest to improve this change description a bit.
> 
> Will the tag “Fixes” become helpful for the commit message?
> 
> 
> …
> > +++ b/drivers/net/usb/hso.c
> …
> > @@ -2311,6 +2313,7 @@  static int hso_serial_common_create(struct hso_serial *serial, int num_urbs,
> >  	return 0;
> >  exit:
> >  	hso_serial_tty_unregister(serial);
> > +exit2:
> >  	hso_serial_common_free(serial);
> >  	return -1;
> >  }
> 
> Can other labels (like “unregister_serial” and “free_serial”) be preferred here?
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id’ed301919932f777713b9172e525674157e983d#n485
> 
> Regards,
> Markus

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot