Re: [1/3] mfd/omap-usb-tll: Delete two error messages for a failed memory allocation in usbtll_omap_probe()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



>>> Now, if probe function calls devm_kzalloc two times and one of them fails,
>>> you cannot easily say which one without looking at assembly listing.
>>
>> Will this situation change with any other implementation for such backtraces?
> 
> How much that situation changes depends mainly on that very person who is
> sending bugreport and his/her ability and willigness to eventually change
> said implementation.

Have you got any more influence on the selection?

Which variant was applied for your example?


> In the other words your question (presumably) expects a world of
> ideal backtraces, which is (so far) rarely the case.

I assume that further software evolution will matter.

Does an article like “The ORCs are coming” (by Jonathan Corbet from 2017-07-20)
point information out which is also useful for this issue here?

https://lwn.net/Articles/728339/


> Anyway, if we agree to change the way we allocate driver data here,
> the issue this debate is about will no longer exist.

Does your update suggestion contain still any additional error messages for
memory allocation failures?

Regards,
Markus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux