Re: [PATCH RESEND] wifi: iwlwifi: mvm: fix an error code in iwl_mvm_alloc_sta_after_restart()

[Kalle Valo]

Ma Ke <make24@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Dan Carpenter<dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:.
>> The Subject says RESEND but doesn't explain why you are resending..
>> You probably meant v2, but again it needs an explanation..
>> .
>> On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 12:27:40PM +0800, Ma Ke wrote:.
>> > This error path should return -EINVAL instead of success..
>> .
>> Why do you feel that way?  Have you tested it?  What is the user visible.
>> effect of this bug?.
>> .
>> I slightly feel hypocritical because I have send lots of commit messages.
>> with exactly this commit message.  The difference is that I only send.
>> really easy patches where it's obvious what the intent was.  A normal.
>> kernel developer wouldn't need to leave their email client or view any.
>> outside information to see that my patch is correct.  If a patch is not.
>> dead easy, I normally just report it.  (Sometimes I report dead easy.
>> bugs as well because I am lazy and maybe it's the end of my work day.
>> or whatever)..
>> .
>> This patch on the other hand is more subtle and it's not clear why the.
>> continue statements changed into returns..
>> .
>> regards,.
>> dan carpenter.
> Thank you for your response to the vulnerability I submitted. Yes, we .
> believe there is a similar issue. As described in [1], it gets pointers .
> which are handled under the protection mechanism. If the path is error, it .
> should return -EINVAL directly instead of success.

The commit message should explain _why_ it should return an error.
Currently there's no explanation neither in the commit message or in
your email.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html