[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7vtlzppunpkrzwpdfplyzcm53fpxik335wtng7ethfjyvu4tph@df5xusqn25it>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 19:37:48 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
To: ALOK TIWARI <alok.a.tiwari@...cle.com>
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()
On Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 06:55:29PM GMT, ALOK TIWARI wrote:
> 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,
No, I don't have bandwidth right now.
> Should that be an RFC (for cleanup task) patch ?
>
No need of RFC.
- Mani
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
Powered by blists - more mailing lists