On 6/13/22 1:47 AM, Damien Le Moal wrote: >>> As the possible failure of the devm_ioremap(), the return value >>> could be NULL. Therefore it should be better to check it and >>> print error message, return '-ENOMEM' error code. > > This error is very unlikely. So unless you are seeing actual problems in > the field, I do not think it is worth fixing. The error paths should absolutely be fixed. It helps avoid an oops later... >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Li Qiong <liqiong@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Reviewed-by: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@xxxxxx> >>> --- >>> v2: >>> - add driver's name (pata_pxa) to subject. >>> --- >>> drivers/ata/pata_pxa.c | 5 +++++ >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/ata/pata_pxa.c b/drivers/ata/pata_pxa.c >>> index 985f42c4fd70..cd1a8f37f920 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/ata/pata_pxa.c >>> +++ b/drivers/ata/pata_pxa.c >>> @@ -228,6 +228,11 @@ static int pxa_ata_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> ap->ioaddr.bmdma_addr = devm_ioremap(&pdev->dev, dma_res->start, >>> resource_size(dma_res)); >> >> Looking again into this driver, this statement doesn't make sense: dma_res >> points to a DMA resource, calling devm_ioremap() on it is just wrong... and > > Yes, having to do an ioremap of an IORESOURCE_DMA resource is rather > unusual. dmaengine_slave_config() should be doing anything that is > required for that resource. > >> 'ap->ioaddr.bmdma_addr' doesn;t seem to be used anyways... > > It is used in lbata-sff.c. Where exactly? To me, it looked like all ata_bmdma_port_ops were overridden by the driver... Even if not so, I don't think such code is correct... > > A much cleaner fix would be to use > devm_platform_get_and_ioremap_resource() or > devm_platform_ioremap_resource() which will also remove the call to > platform_get_resource((). This is an -rc1 material. > But as mentioned above, unless this is fixing an > actual bug in production, I do not think this is worth it. I strongly disagree here. MBR, Sergey
