linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] pwm: dwc: simplify error handling

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, 12 Feb 2024 13:52:09 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Raag Jadav <raag.jadav@...el.com>
Cc: u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
	mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com, lakshmi.sowjanya.d@...el.com,
	linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] pwm: dwc: simplify error handling

On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 10:33:01PM +0200, Raag Jadav wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 07:22:13PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 12:35:27PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:

..

> > > +		return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to enable device (%pe)\n", ERR_PTR(ret));
> > 
> > Have you checked the output?
> > Note, it will duplicate error codes which we don't want.
> 
> True. Does it make sense to remove it?

"...which we don't want." had been stated above :-)

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko