Re: [PATCH -next v2] dmaengine: ste_dma40: fix error return code in d40_probe()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> In many of the error handling case, the return value 'ret' not set
> and 0 will be return from d40_probe() even if error, but we should
> return a negative error code instead in those error handling case.
> This patch fixed them, and also removed useless variable 'err'.

Hold on, please.

> --- a/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/ste_dma40.c

> @@ -3619,6 +3618,7 @@ static int __init d40_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>                 if (IS_ERR(base->lcpa_regulator)) {
>                         d40_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to get lcpa_regulator\n");
>                         base->lcpa_regulator = NULL;
> +                       ret = PTR_ERR(base->lcpa_regulator);

Is it really what we want?

I thixh you may remove that NULL assignment.


>                         goto failure;
>                 }
>

> @@ -3647,8 +3647,8 @@ static int __init d40_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>         d40_hw_init(base);
>
>         if (np) {
> -               err = of_dma_controller_register(np, d40_xlate, NULL);
> -               if (err && err != -ENODEV)
> +               ret = of_dma_controller_register(np, d40_xlate, NULL);
> +               if (ret && ret != -ENODEV)

>From the discussion of dw_dmac I remember we decide that ENODEV check
is redundant.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/