linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/13] mfd: pm8008: fix regmap irq chip initialisation

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: <ZjyOGNAaWjRtOE0s@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 10:49:28 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Das Srinagesh <quic_gurus@...cinc.com>,
	Satya Priya <quic_c_skakit@...cinc.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] mfd: pm8008: fix regmap irq chip initialisation

On Tue, May 07, 2024 at 08:16:45PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 6:01 PM Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 09:56:05PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > Mon, May 06, 2024 at 05:08:19PM +0200, Johan Hovold kirjoitti:
> > > > The regmap irq array is potentially shared between multiple PMICs and
> 
> ...
> 
> > > > -                   dev_err(dev, "Failed to probe irq periphs: %d\n", rc);
> > > > +                   dev_err(dev, "failed to add IRQ chip: %d\n", rc);
> > >
> > > dev_err_probe(...); ?
> >
> > This function won't return -EPROBE_DEFER,
> 
> This is not an argument for a long time (since documentation of
> dev_err_probe() had been amended to encourage its use for any error
> cases in probe).

There was apparently a kernel doc update made in December 2023:

	532888a59505 ("driver core: Better advertise dev_err_probe()")

to clarify that people are *allowed* to use it also for functions not
returning -EPROBE_DEFER. That's hardly a long time ago and, importantly,
this is of course still nothing that is *required*.

> > and that would be a separate
> > change in any case.
> 
> Sure, but why to add a technical debt? Perhaps a precursor cleanup patch?

This is not in any way technical debt.

Johan