[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd6eea67-df0f-08b1-61cd-57a3b4f9cf0d@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2023 12:43:12 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
ChiaEn Wu <chiaen_wu@...htek.com>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: dan.carpenter@...aro.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
error27@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] power: supply: mt6370: Fix missing error code in
mt6370_chg_toggle_cfo()
Il 06/09/23 10:48, Harshit Mogalapalli ha scritto:
> When mt6370_chg_field_get() suceeds, ret is set to zero and returning
> zero when flash led is still in strobe mode looks incorrect.
>
> Fixes: 233cb8a47d65 ("power: supply: mt6370: Add MediaTek MT6370 charger driver")
> Signed-off-by: Harshit Mogalapalli <harshit.m.mogalapalli@...cle.com>
> ---
> This is based on static analysis with smatch, only compile tested.
> ---
> drivers/power/supply/mt6370-charger.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/power/supply/mt6370-charger.c b/drivers/power/supply/mt6370-charger.c
> index f27dae5043f5..a9641bd3d8cf 100644
> --- a/drivers/power/supply/mt6370-charger.c
> +++ b/drivers/power/supply/mt6370-charger.c
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int mt6370_chg_toggle_cfo(struct mt6370_priv *priv)
>
> if (fl_strobe) {
> dev_err(priv->dev, "Flash led is still in strobe mode\n");
> - return ret;
> + return -EINVAL;
I think that returning 0 here was intentional, but I agree on a return ret
here being both confusing and wrong.
That's how I get this logic:
The function is enabling strobe mode, but if the flash led is *already* in
strobe mode, the function exits cleanly because there's nothing to do, as
the enablement is already done.
Hence.... I believe that the right fix is not to return -EINVAL, but rather
to change that to `return 0` instead.
ChiaEn, can you please confirm, or deny my statement?
Regards,
Angelo
> }
>
> /* cfo off */
Powered by blists - more mailing lists