linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] soc: qcom: pbs: Simplify with dev_err

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: <10fad15b-d2a6-4ec1-8af7-bde8f7bf39be@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 12:03:20 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Yu Jiaoliang
 <yujiaoliang@...o.com>, Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
 Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: opensource.kernel@...o.com, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] soc: qcom: pbs: Simplify with dev_err_probe()

On 30.08.2024 10:08 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 29/08/2024 14:48, Yu Jiaoliang wrote:
>> Error handling in probe() can be a bit simpler with dev_err_probe().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yu Jiaoliang <yujiaoliang@...o.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/soc/qcom/qcom-pbs.c | 7 +++----
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/qcom-pbs.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/qcom-pbs.c
>> index 77a70d3d0d0b..ab9de12ec901 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/qcom-pbs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/qcom-pbs.c
>> @@ -201,10 +201,9 @@ static int qcom_pbs_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	ret = device_property_read_u32(pbs->dev, "reg", &val);
>> -	if (ret < 0) {
>> -		dev_err(pbs->dev, "Couldn't find reg, ret = %d\n", ret);
>> -		return ret;
>> -	}
>> +	if (ret < 0)
>> +		return dev_err_probe(pbs->dev, ret, "Couldn't find reg\n");
> 
> This cannot defer, so not much benefits. And you ignore other place in
> the probe()... That's like a weird pattern with all your patches change
> something irrelevant, but leave other places unchanged.
> 
> That's pointless and churn.

Hm, that's a good point.. Maybe the static checker folks could come up
with a way that would find functions that call something that can defer
at one point or another and suggest (not) using dev_err_probe with W=1/2..
(although that is probably not going to be very high prio given all the
other static checker issues we're still yet to resolve)

Unless we have something like that already? +CC Dan

Konrad