linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PCI: rockchip: Propagate 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANAwSgQEqv2a1MGkGtj8CpXSKOXv=_wV3afOgn=iri7uqnj1bw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2025 14:35:31 +0530
From: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
Cc: linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, 
	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>, 
	Krzysztof Wilczyński <kwilczynski@...nel.org>, 
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>, Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, 
	Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PCI: rockchip: Propagate dev_err_probe return value

Hi Markus,

On Sat, 18 Oct 2025 at 13:09, Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de> wrote:
>
> > Ensure that the return value from dev_err_probe() is consistently assigned
> > back to return in all error paths within rockchip_pcie_init_port()
> > function. This ensures the original error code are propagation for
> > debugging.
>
> I find the change description improvable.
>
Ok, is this ok?

When using the dev_err_probe() helper function in rockchip_pcie_init_port(),
ensure its return value is consistently assigned to the return variable. This
guarantees that the original error code, whether it's a specific error
or -EPROBE_DEFER,
is correctly propagated up the call stack for proper error handling
and debugging.

>
> Would an other source code variant become more desirable?
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.17.1/source/drivers/base/core.c#L5031-L5075
>
>         err = dev_err_probe(dev,
>                             reset_control_bulk_assert(ROCKCHIP_NUM_CORE_RSTS, rockchip->core_rsts),
>                             "Couldn't assert Core resets\n");
>         if (err)
>                 goto err_exit_phy;
No, the correct code ensures that dev_err_probe() is only called when
an actual error has
occurred, providing a clear and accurate log entry. For deferred probe
(-EPROBE_DEFER),
it will correctly log at a debug level, as intended for that scenario.
For other errors, it will provide
a standard error message.
>
>
> Regards,
> Markus

Thanks
-Anand