Hi,
On 10/25/21 13:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 12:42 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> The discrete.c code is not the only code which needs to lookup the
>> acpi_device and device-name for the sensor for which the INT3472
>> ACPI-device is a GPIO/clk/regulator provider.
>>
>> The tps68470.c code also needs this functionality, so factor this
>> out into a new get_sensor_adev_and_name() helper.
>
> ...
>
>> +int skl_int3472_get_sensor_adev_and_name(struct device *dev,
>> + struct acpi_device **sensor_adev_ret,
>> + const char **name_ret)
>> +{
>> + struct acpi_device *adev = ACPI_COMPANION(dev);
>> + struct acpi_device *sensor;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + sensor = acpi_dev_get_first_consumer_dev(adev);
>> + if (!sensor) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "INT3472 seems to have no dependents.\n");
>> + return -ENODEV;
>> + }
>> +
>> + *name_ret = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT,
>> + acpi_dev_name(sensor));
>> + if (!*name_ret)
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + if (ret == 0 && sensor_adev_ret)
>> + *sensor_adev_ret = sensor;
>> + else
>> + acpi_dev_put(sensor);
>> +
>> + return ret;
>
> The error path is twisted a bit including far staying ret=0 assignment.
>
> Can it be
>
> int ret;
> ...
> *name_ret = devm_kasprintf(dev, GFP_KERNEL, I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT,
> acpi_dev_name(sensor));
> if (!*name_ret) {
> acpi_dev_put(sensor);
> return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> if (sensor_adev_ret)
> *sensor_adev_ret = sensor;
>
> return 0;
>
> ?
That misses an acpi_dev_put(sensor) when sensor_adev_ret == NULL.
Regards,
Hans
