[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZtWQzwvo7f0QfeCI@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2024 13:17:51 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: oe-kbuild@...ts.linux.dev,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, lkp@...el.com,
oe-kbuild-all@...ts.linux.dev,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] platform/x86: int3472: Simplify dev_err_probe()
usage
On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 11:31:53AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
>
> https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]
>
> url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Andy-Shevchenko/driver-core-Ignore-0-in-dev_err_probe/20240826-113856
> base: driver-core/driver-core-testing
> patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240822130722.1261891-3-andriy.shevchenko%40linux.intel.com
> patch subject: [PATCH v2 2/4] platform/x86: int3472: Simplify dev_err_probe() usage
> config: i386-randconfig-141-20240830 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20240831/202408310807.sNPe5Mr2-lkp@intel.com/config)
> compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
>
> If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
> the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
> | Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> | Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202408310807.sNPe5Mr2-lkp@intel.com/
>
> smatch warnings:
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/discrete.c:292 skl_int3472_handle_gpio_resources() error: uninitialized symbol 'err_msg'.
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/discrete.c:292 skl_int3472_handle_gpio_resources() warn: passing zero to 'dev_err_probe'
Okay, I might agree on the err_msg, which is good to have to be passed anyway.
In such a case it might be good to have a dev_dbg() in the dev_err_probe() to
say that it is likely a bug in the code.
Would you accept that approach?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists