[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aJr92bN5iQnIzTbP@stanley.mountain>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2025 11:39:53 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Louis Chauvet <louis.chauvet@...tlin.com>
Cc: José Expósito <jose.exposito89@...il.com>,
hamohammed.sa@...il.com, simona@...ll.ch, melissa.srw@...il.com,
maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org,
tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/vkms: Assert if vkms_config_create_*() fails
On Mon, Aug 11, 2025 at 07:21:18PM +0200, Louis Chauvet wrote:
>
>
> Le 11/08/2025 à 12:15, José Expósito a écrit :
> > Check that the value returned by the vkms_config_create_*() functions is
> > valid. Otherwise, assert and finish the KUnit test.
> >
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/dri-devel/aJTL6IFEBaI8gqtH@stanley.mountain/
> > Signed-off-by: José Expósito <jose.exposito89@...il.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Louis Chauvet <louis.chauvet@...tlin.com>
>
> I am not sure on how to use smach, I don't have any warning at all for the
> whole kernel, so I will wait for Dan Carpenter review before applying.
>
Looks good. Thanks!
Reviewed-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
> Side question: should we use __must_check in this case to warn at compile
> time?
We wouldn't normally... It turns out the existing code was already
checking for errors so this is really just a "silence the checker"
patch.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists