On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 11:20:42AM -0700, Brett Creeley wrote:
> On 7/24/2023 6:00 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 12:09:58AM -0700, Brett Creeley wrote:
> > > On 7/21/2023 2:01 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > From: Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2023 6:35 AM
> > > > >
> > > > > +void pds_vfio_unregister_client_cmd(struct pds_vfio_pci_device *pds_vfio)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > + struct pci_dev *pdev = pds_vfio_to_pci_dev(pds_vfio);
> > > > > + int err;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + err = pds_client_unregister(pci_physfn(pdev), pds_vfio->client_id);
> > > > > + if (err)
> > > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unregister from DSC failed: %pe\n",
> > > > > + ERR_PTR(err));
> > > >
> > > > Why using ERR_PTR() here? it looks a common pattern used cross
> > > > this series.
> > >
> > > Yes, this is intentional. This is more readable than just printing out the
> > > error value.
> >
> > That seems like a hack, it would be nicer if printk could format
> > errnos natively
>
> This is already being used all over the driver hierarchy.
That seems like an overstatement. The 100 places it is already used
would all be better as some '%de' instead.
Jason
