On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 23:00:01 -0300
Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Previously, ad2s90_probe ignored the return code from spi_setup, not
> handling its possible failure. This patch makes ad2s90_probe check if
> the code is an error code and, if so, do the following:
>
> - Call dev_err with an appropriate error message.
> - Return the spi_setup's error code, aborting the execution of the
> rest of the function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/staging/iio/resolver/ad2s90.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/iio/resolver/ad2s90.c b/drivers/staging/iio/resolver/ad2s90.c
> index 11fac9f90148..d6a42e3f1bd8 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/iio/resolver/ad2s90.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/iio/resolver/ad2s90.c
> @@ -88,7 +88,12 @@ static int ad2s90_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
> /* need 600ns between CS and the first falling edge of SCLK */
> spi->max_speed_hz = 830000;
> spi->mode = SPI_MODE_3;
> - spi_setup(spi);
> + ret = spi_setup(spi);
> +
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + dev_err(&spi->dev, "spi_setup failed!\n");
> + return ret;
> + }
I would have reordered this first to be before the iio_device_register call.
The reason being that it would avoid this comment.
Drop the return ret out of the block above and return ret unconditionally.
I don't mind too much as I know this is moving later, but I only know that
because of the earlier discussion ;) Few reviewers read the whole patch
set before responding to the early patches - it's just too much like hard
work. So if you can do things in an order that minimizes standard responses
then that's great.
Patch is fine though - could be solved by a comment in the intro that
says the code in question will move in patch X.
Jonathan
>
> return 0;
> }
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
