On 01/12/2018 02:37 AM, weiyongjun (A) wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:12:41AM +0000, Wei Yongjun wrote:
>>> In case of error, the function devm_iio_device_alloc() returns NULL
>>> pointer not ERR_PTR(). The IS_ERR() test in the return value check
>>> should be replaced with NULL test.
>>>
>>> Fixes: e2e6771c6462 ("IIO: ADC: add STM32 DFSDM sigma delta ADC
>> support")
>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <weiyongjun1@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-
>> dfsdm-adc.c
>>> index e628d04..5e87140 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/stm32-dfsdm-adc.c
>>> @@ -1100,9 +1100,9 @@ static int stm32_dfsdm_adc_probe(struct
>> platform_device *pdev)
>>> dev_data = (const struct stm32_dfsdm_dev_data *)of_id->data;
>>>
>>> iio = devm_iio_device_alloc(dev, sizeof(*adc));
>>> - if (IS_ERR(iio)) {
>>> + if (!iio) {
>>> dev_err(dev, "%s: Failed to allocate IIO\n", __func__);
>>> - return PTR_ERR(iio);
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> }
>>>
>>> adc = iio_priv(iio);
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> This one doesn't return an error pointer either. The check causes a
>> static check warning for me. (It can't actually fail, though so maybe
>> it will return an error pointer in the future?)
>
> It seems that we can simply remove the check since 'adc' can never
> be an invalid address here.
Agree, i'm preparing patches for all issue you highlight,
Thanks for all your remarks
Arnaud
>
> Regards,
> Yongjun Wei
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
