linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] spi: geni-qcom: Use devm functions to simplify code

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <37f07293-bbfa-7194-b5f7-fa2aec982a67@huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2024 09:17:59 +0800
From: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
CC: <broonie@...nel.org>, <akashast@...eaurora.org>, <vkoul@...nel.org>,
	<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] spi: geni-qcom: Use devm functions to simplify
 code



On 2024/9/14 0:27, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 11:44 PM Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2024/9/12 21:38, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2024 at 8:53 PM Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> @@ -1132,6 +1134,12 @@ static int spi_geni_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>>         if (ret)
>>>>>>                 return ret;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +       ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, spi_geni_release_dma_chan, mas);
>>>>>> +       if (ret) {
>>>>>> +               dev_err(dev, "Unable to add action.\n");
>>>>>> +               return ret;
>>>>>> +       }
>>>>>
>>>>> Use dev_err_probe() to simplify.
>>>>>
>>>>> ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, spi_geni_release_dma_chan, mas);
>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>   return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Unable to add action.\n");
>>>>
>>>> It seems that if it only return -ENOMEM or 0, using dev_err_probe() has
>>>> not not much value for many community maintainers.
>>>
>>> While I won't insist, it still has some value to use dev_err_probe()
>>> as I talked about in commit 7065f92255bb ("driver core: Clarify that
>>> dev_err_probe() is OK even w/out -EPROBE_DEFER")
>> The main difference is that when use dev_err_probe()，there will print
>> anything on -ENOMEM now.
> 
> Oh, I see. You're saying that we should just get rid of the print
> altogether because the only error case is -ENOMEM and the kernel
> already splats there? Yeah, that sounds right to me. That doesn't
> match what you did in v5, though...

I think the following 2 soultion is both fine:

1、return ret directly.

2、dev_err() and return.

> 
> -Doug