On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 05:42:44PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 04:04:14PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > @@ -75,20 +75,16 @@ static int fbtft_request_one_gpio(struct fbtft_par *par, > > struct gpio_desc **gpiop) > > { > > struct device *dev = par->info->device; > > - int ret = 0; > > > > *gpiop = devm_gpiod_get_index_optional(dev, name, index, > > GPIOD_OUT_LOW); > > - if (IS_ERR(*gpiop)) { > > - ret = PTR_ERR(*gpiop); > > - dev_err(dev, > > - "Failed to request %s GPIO: %d\n", name, ret); > > - return ret; > > - } > > + if (IS_ERR(*gpiop)) > > + dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(*gpiop), "Failed to request %s GPIO\n", name); > > This should be a return statement: > > return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(*gpiop), "Failed to request %s GPIO\n", name); > I've created a new Smatch check for these: drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251xfd/mcp251xfd-core.c:2890 mcp251xfd_probe() warn: pointer error 'PTR_ERR(clk)' not handled There aren't that many bugs... Anyway, I'm running a test now and I guess we'll see tomorrow how it goes. regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel