linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] iio: light: stk3310: log error if reading the chip id fails

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 18:05:54 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Aren Moynihan <aren@...cevolution.org>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, 
	Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, 
	Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, 
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Ondrej Jirman <megi@....cz>, 
	Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev, 
	Willow Barraco <contact@...lowbarraco.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] iio: light: stk3310: log error if reading the chip id fails

On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 8:57 PM Aren Moynihan <aren@...cevolution.org> wrote:
>
> If the chip isn't powered, this call is likely to return an error.
> Without a log here the driver will silently fail to probe. Common errors
> are ENXIO (when the chip isn't powered) and ETIMEDOUT (when the i2c bus
> isn't powered).

>         ret = regmap_read(data->regmap, STK3310_REG_ID, &chipid);
> -       if (ret < 0)
> +       if (ret < 0) {
> +               dev_err(&client->dev, "failed to read chip id: %d", ret);
>                 return ret;
> +       }

Briefly looking at the code it seems that this one is strictly part of
the probe phase, which means we may use

  return dev_err_probe(...);

pattern. Yet, you may add another patch to clean up all of them:
_probe(), _init(), _regmap_init() to use the same pattern everywhere.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko