linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mv64xxx: add an optional reset-gpios property

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20231013093407.p2oqsagk62vrqacc@zenone.zhora.eu>
Date:   Fri, 13 Oct 2023 11:34:07 +0200
From:   Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
To:     Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc:     Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
        "gregory.clement@...tlin.com" <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        "linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mv64xxx: add an optional reset-gpios property

Hi Chris,

...

>              static struct mv64xxx_i2c_regs mv64xxx_i2c_regs_mv64xxx = {
>             @@ -1083,6 +1084,10 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd)
>                     if (drv_data->irq < 0)
>                             return drv_data->irq;
> 
>             +       drv_data->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(&pd->dev, "reset", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
>             +       if (IS_ERR(drv_data->reset_gpio))
>             +               return PTR_ERR(drv_data->reset_gpio);
> 
>         if this optional why are we returning in case of error?
> 
> gpiod_get_optional() will return NULL if the property is not present. The main
> error I care about here is -EPROBE_DEFER but I figure other errors are also
> relevant. This same kind of pattern is used in other drivers.

we already discussed about this, I don't have a strong opinion,
you can leave it as it is... I recon this is a matter of pure
taste.

Would you just mind adding an error message using
dev_err_probe()?

Thanks,
Andi