On Thu, 11 May 2017 18:17:01 +0200 SF Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 17:33:14 +0200 > > Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this function. > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > Link: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/LCJ16-Refactor_Strings-WSang_0.pdf > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c b/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c > index 6802d74f162c..96328aebae5a 100644 > --- a/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c > +++ b/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c > @@ -1149,7 +1149,5 @@ struct hv_device *vmbus_device_create(const uuid_le *type, > - if (!child_device_obj) { > - pr_err("Unable to allocate device object for child device\n"); > + if (!child_device_obj) > return NULL; > - } > > child_device_obj->channel = channel; > memcpy(&child_device_obj->dev_type, type, sizeof(uuid_le)); Taking out the message assumes that all callers of this function either log an error or pass appropriate error code back to userspace. Did you walk back through all the callers? Just because an automated tool says that this needs to change does not mean it has to. _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
