[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250724073308430368ff@mail.local>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 09:33:08 +0200
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
To: Salah Triki <salah.triki@...il.com>
Cc: linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc: twl: Check return value of platform_get_irq()
On 24/07/2025 03:06:31+0100, Salah Triki wrote:
> platform_get_irq() may fail, so check its return value and propagate
> the error in case of failure.
>
> Signed-off-by: Salah Triki <salah.triki@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/rtc/rtc-twl.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-twl.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-twl.c
> index e6106e67e1f4..992b3e1347f2 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-twl.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-twl.c
> @@ -224,8 +224,11 @@ static int twl_rtc_alarm_irq_enable(struct device *dev, unsigned enabled)
> {
> struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> struct twl_rtc *twl_rtc = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> - int irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> - int ret;
> + int irq, ret;
> +
> + irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> + if (irq < 0)
> + return irq;
It won't ever fail because we know it already succeeded earlier.
>
> if (enabled) {
> ret = set_rtc_irq_bit(twl_rtc,
> --
> 2.43.0
>
--
Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists