linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] iio: accel: adxl345_core: Introduce set_mode and data

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 1 May 2017 23:07:44 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk>
Cc:     Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Eva Rachel Retuya <eraretuya@...il.com>,
        linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@...log.com>,
        Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>,
        Alison Schofield <amsfield22@...il.com>,
        Florian Vaussard <florian.vaussard@...g-vd.ch>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] iio: accel: adxl345_core: Introduce set_mode and
 data_ready functions

On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Jonathan Cameron
<jic23@...23.retrosnub.co.uk> wrote:
> On 1 May 2017 20:42:08 BST, Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>>On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 3:22 AM, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
>>wrote:
>>> On 29/04/17 08:48, Eva Rachel Retuya wrote:
>>
>>>> +static int adxl345_set_mode(struct adxl345_data *data, u8 mode)
>>>> +{
>>>> +     struct device *dev = regmap_get_device(data->regmap);
>>>> +     int ret;
>>>> +
>>>> +     ret = regmap_write(data->regmap, ADXL345_REG_POWER_CTL, mode);
>>>> +     if (ret < 0) {
>>>> +             dev_err(dev, "Failed to set power mode, %d\n", ret);
>>>> +             return ret;
>>> drop the return ret here and just return ret at the end of the
>>function.
>>> One of the static checkers will probably moan about this otherwise.
>>
>>But this will be not equivalent!
> Why? Regmap_write returns 0 for success.

If there is a qurantee that regmap_write() doesn't return any positive
values, I'm okay with replacement.

>>
>>>> +     }
>>>> +
>>>> +     return 0;
>>>> +}

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko