[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf18193a-5a49-4e0c-b07a-a4f705fc5c8c@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 18:55:29 +0530
From: ALOK TIWARI <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
Cc: daire.mcnamara@...rochip.com, lpieralisi@...nel.org,
kwilczynski@...nel.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com, robh@...nel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xichao Zhao <zhao.xichao@...o.com>
Subject: Re: [External] : Re: [PATCH] PCI: plda: Remove the use of
dev_err_probe()
Hi Mani,
On 9/8/2025 3:43 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 04:52:00PM GMT, Xichao Zhao wrote:
>> The dev_err_probe() doesn't do anything when error is '-ENOMEM'.
>> Therefore, remove the useless call to dev_err_probe(), and just
>> return the value instead.
>>
>
> Change is fine as it is. But I think devm_pci_alloc_host_bridge() should return
> the actual error pointer instead of NULL and let the callers guess the errno.
>
> Callers are using both -ENOMEM and -ENODEV, both of then will mask the actual
> errno that caused the failure.
>
> Cleanup task for someone interested :)
>
> - Mani
Did you really intend to do that,
Should that be an RFC (for cleanup task) patch ?
Thanks,
Alok
Powered by blists - more mailing lists