At 2022-06-23 21:25:55, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Thu, Jun 23, 2022 at 3:21 PM huhai <15815827059@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> From: huhai <huhai@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> register_device_clock() misses a check for platform_device_register_simple(). >> Add a check to fix it. >> >> Signed-off-by: huhai <huhai@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c >> index fbe0756259c5..c4d4d21391d7 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_lpss.c >> @@ -422,6 +422,9 @@ static int register_device_clock(struct acpi_device *adev, >> if (!lpss_clk_dev) >> lpt_register_clock_device(); >> >> + if (IS_ERR(lpss_clk_dev)) >> + return PTR_ERR(lpss_clk_dev); >> + > >Why not use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() instead? platform_device_register_simple() never returns NULL as it declared bellowing， so use IS_ERR() to validate the return value should be enough. /** * platform_device_register_simple - add a platform-level device and its resources * ... * Returns &struct platform_device pointer on success, or ERR_PTR() on error. */ Thanks. > >> clk_data = platform_get_drvdata(lpss_clk_dev); >> if (!clk_data) >> return -ENODEV; >> -- >> 2.27.0 >> >> >> No virus found >> Checked by Hillstone Network AntiVirus >>
