On 11.12.2024 10:56, Krzysztof Karas wrote: > drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() may return NULL on failure, which will not > be caught via IS_ERR(), so replace it with IS_ERR_OR_NULL() macro. > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Karas <krzysztof.karas@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c > index 94198bc04939..6c960416f776 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c > @@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ int intel_dp_tunnel_mgr_init(struct intel_display *display) > drm_connector_list_iter_end(&connector_list_iter); > > tunnel_mgr = drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create(display->drm, dp_connectors); > - if (IS_ERR(tunnel_mgr)) > + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tunnel_mgr)) > return PTR_ERR(tunnel_mgr); this still will not work as expected, since in case of NULL it will return 0 (success) instead of "a negative error code" as described in the documentation of the intel_dp_tunnel_mgr_init() OTOH the documentation of drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() says: "Returns a pointer to the tunnel manager if created successfully or NULL in case of an error" so more appropriate fix seems to be: - if (IS_ERR(tunnel_mgr)) - return PTR_ERR(tunnel_mgr); + if (!tunnel_mgr) + return -ENOMEM; but then it will not work with the drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() stub which actually returns undocumented ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP) so unless you are ready to update implementation and documentation of the drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() to return ERR_PTR instead of NULL in case of error, the fix IMO should look more like: + if (!tunnel_mgr) + return -ENOMEM; and keep existing IS_ERR check > > display->dp_tunnel_mgr = tunnel_mgr;
