linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 13/18] leds: pca963x: switch to device_for_each_child_node

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: <Z0Iw77gpGgIE6fLT@surfacebook.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 21:45:51 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>
Cc: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
	Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
	AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
	Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>,
	Jacek Anaszewski <jacek.anaszewski@...il.com>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
	linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/18] leds: pca963x: switch to
 device_for_each_child_node_scoped()

Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 01:21:04AM +0200, Javier Carrasco kirjoitti:
> Switch to device_for_each_child_node_scoped() to simplify the code by
> removing the need for calls to fwnode_handle_put() in the error paths.
> 
> This also prevents possible memory leaks if new error paths are added
> without the required call to fwnode_handle_put().
> 
> After switching to the scoped variant, there is no longer need for a
> jump to 'err', as an immediate return is possible.

...

>  		if (ret || reg >= chipdef->n_leds) {
>  			dev_err(dev, "Invalid 'reg' property for node %pfw\n",
>  				child);
> -			ret = -EINVAL;
> -			goto err;
> +			return -EINVAL;
>  		}

I'm not sure how interpret this message, but the problem here is the shadowing
of the original error code. Hence I would split this:

		if (ret)
			return ret; // possibly return dev_err_probe() with another message
		if (reg >= chipdef->n_leds)
			return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, "Invalid 'reg' property for node %pfw\n",
					     child);

...

>  		if (ret) {
>  			dev_err(dev, "Failed to register LED for node %pfw\n",
>  				child);
> -			goto err;
> +			return ret;

			return dev_err_probe(...);

>  		}

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko