Re: [PATCH] staging: wilc1000: fix undefined reference to `__this_module' compilation error

[Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 03:51:55PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 02:13:24PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:43:58PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 01:08:38PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:13:06PM +0530, Ajay Singh wrote:
> > > > >  	wilc_dir = debugfs_create_dir("wilc_wifi", NULL);
> > > > > -	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(debugfs_info); i++) {
> > > > > -		info = &debugfs_info[i];
> > > > > -		debugfs_create_file(info->name,
> > > > > -				    info->perm,
> > > > > -				    wilc_dir,
> > > > > -				    &info->data,
> > > > > -				    &info->fops);
> > > > > +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(wilc_dir)) {
> > > > > +		pr_err("Error creating debugfs\n");
> > > > > +		return -EFAULT;
> > > > >  	}
> > > > 
> > > > Just check for NULL.  If someone builds without debugfs enabled in their
> > > > .config, that's their choice.  No need to print a warning.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Reading it again, I'm not sure my email was clear...  Just do this:
> > > 
> > > 	wilc_dir = debugfs_create_dir("wilc_wifi", NULL);
> > > 	if (!wilc_dir)) {
> > > 		pr_err("Error creating debugfs/wilc_wifi/\n");
> > > 		return;
> > > 	}
> > > 
> > > If debugfs_create_dir() returns an error pointer it means all the other
> > > debugfs functions are also just no-op stub functions.  Passing an error
> > > pointer to them is harmless.
> > 
> > No, please never care about the return value of a debugfs call, it
> > should never cause your code flow to do anything different.  THis should
> > just be:
> > 	wilc_dir = debugfs_create_dir("wilc_wifi", NULL);
> > and then keep on going.  You can always pass the return value of a
> > debugfs call to another one, no need to check anything.
> > 
> > I've done a large sweep of the kernel tree for most of this pattern for
> > 4.18, and will keep doing it over time, as it keeps creeping back.
> 
> Yeah, that's how I thought it was supposed be but then the cleanup
> doesn't work.  We end up putting all the new debugfs files in the base
> debugsf directory.  Doesn't it lead to a use after free if we unload the
> module?

If the creation of a directory fails, then almost always the creation of
files will also fail, so no real problem here as your system is really
hosed at that point in time. :)

thanks,

greg k-h