On Jul 10, 9:37pm, David Holland wrote: } On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 08:45:15PM -0700, John Nemeth wrote: } > } The substance of that reservation is that there's not much point doing } > } it without also taking the time to correct the behavior, i.e., back } > } out properly if something fails. And that requires attention, not just } > } mechanical changes. } > } > Sure, but that's something that can be done over time, driver } > by driver. The first step is the infrastructure support (changing } > the return type, having autoconf respond intelligently, etc.). } > The very first step of changing the return type is a purely mechanical } > change. } } Well, yes, but if you change the return type mechanically first then } you end up with a thousand or two attach functions that *look* like } they handle errors but actually don't.
Thanks for the reminder. I meant to add to my list of steps that the xxx_attach() function needs to be flagged somehow (possibly with a standardised comment) to show that it still needs to be audited. The flag is something that needs to be easily found mechanically so that lists can be made. Also, I expect that some drivers will never be audited/tested since there are drivers for ancient hardware that very few people now own/use. Of course, that might be a hint that the driver should be retired (or, at least commented out in GENERIC). }-- End of excerpt from David Holland