[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190322111305.189438111@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 12:15:32 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.0 113/238] nvmem: core: dont check the return value of notifier chain call
5.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
commit f4853e1c321edb48af229ad5ac85076790d34968 upstream.
blocking_notifier_call_chain() returns the value returned by the last
registered callback. A positive return value doesn't indicate an error
and an nvmem device should correctly register irrespective of any
notifier callback failures. Drop the retval check.
Fixes: bee1138bea15 ("nvmem: add a notifier chain")
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Acked-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
drivers/nvmem/core.c | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c
+++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c
@@ -686,9 +686,7 @@ struct nvmem_device *nvmem_register(cons
if (rval)
goto err_remove_cells;
- rval = blocking_notifier_call_chain(&nvmem_notifier, NVMEM_ADD, nvmem);
- if (rval)
- goto err_remove_cells;
+ blocking_notifier_call_chain(&nvmem_notifier, NVMEM_ADD, nvmem);
return nvmem;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists