linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drm/rcar-du: fix comment to rcar_du_group

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]

Message-ID: <169375462648.1779741.7610374659365330420@ping.linuxembedded.co.uk>
Date:   Sun, 03 Sep 2023 16:23:46 +0100
From:   Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>
To:     Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
        Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, lvc-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/rcar-du: fix comment to rcar_du_group_get()

Hi Alexandra

Quoting Alexandra Diupina (2023-09-03 14:37:09)
> rcar_du_group_get() never returns a negative
> error code (always returns 0), so change
> the comment about returned value

If so, then perhaps this may as well become a void return and remove the
return 0.

That could then clean up some redundant error path handling in
drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_crtc.c too ?

Still, this does correct the documentation to match the implementation
as it stands so... for that ...

Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham+renesas@...asonboard.com>

But removing an unused error path seems like a worthy clean up
opportunity too.

> 
> Fixes: cb2025d2509f ("drm/rcar-du: Introduce CRTCs groups")

Hrm ... well the documented behaviour was the same even before this
commit in rcar_du_get(), so perhaps it was documenting the intent... But
it does seem that the return code has been redundant for quite some time
so perhaps it's just not required.


--
Kieran


> Signed-off-by: Alexandra Diupina <adiupina@...ralinux.ru>
> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_group.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_group.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_group.c
> index 2ccd2581f544..499d4e56c32d 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_group.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/renesas/rcar-du/rcar_du_group.c
> @@ -200,7 +200,7 @@ static void rcar_du_group_setup(struct rcar_du_group *rgrp)
>   *
>   * This function must be called with the DRM mode_config lock held.
>   *
> - * Return 0 in case of success or a negative error code otherwise.
> + * Always return 0.
>   */
>  int rcar_du_group_get(struct rcar_du_group *rgrp)
>  {
> -- 
> 2.30.2
>