linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] firmware: exynos-acpm: convert to 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <75f49e65-5a8a-4a52-bed9-31be4a76d536@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2025 11:11:01 +0000
From: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>
To: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>
Cc: Peter Griffin <peter.griffin@...aro.org>,
 Will McVicker <willmcvicker@...gle.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] firmware: exynos-acpm: convert to dev_err_probe() in
 client API



On 3/14/25 4:40 PM, André Draszik wrote:
> dev_err_probe() exists to simplify code and unify error messages by
> using its message template.
> 
> Convert the remaining dev_err() in acpm_get_by_phandle() to
> dev_err_probe().
> 
> Signed-off-by: André Draszik <andre.draszik@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/samsung/exynos-acpm.c | 10 ++++++----
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/samsung/exynos-acpm.c b/drivers/firmware/samsung/exynos-acpm.c
> index 48f1e3cacaa709ae703115169df138b659ddae44..03f907a95c6acd66d89cd8af2f52e7c6dadf492a 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/samsung/exynos-acpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/samsung/exynos-acpm.c
> @@ -701,12 +701,14 @@ static const struct acpm_handle *acpm_get_by_phandle(struct device *dev,
>  
>  	link = device_link_add(dev, &pdev->dev, DL_FLAG_AUTOREMOVE_SUPPLIER);
>  	if (!link) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev,
> -			"Failed to create device link to consumer %s.\n",
> -			dev_name(dev));
> +		int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> +		dev_err_probe(&pdev->dev, ret,
> +			      "Failed to create device link to consumer %s.\n",
> +			      dev_name(dev));
>  		platform_device_put(pdev);
>  		module_put(pdev->dev.driver->owner);
> -		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +		return ERR_PTR(ret);
>  	}
>  
>  	return &acpm->handle;
> 

The clients are indeed expected to call this method in their probe
method. Shall we make such assumption? I'm in the middle here, but I
don't mind if this gets queued:
Reviewed-by: Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@...aro.org>