On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 05:59:40PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 12:49:57PM +0100, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: ... > > + ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "maxim,constant-current-disable", &outconf); > > + if (ret && (ret != -EINVAL)) > > + return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENODEV, > > Why shadowing the real error code? > > > + "Failed to read maxim,constant-current-disable OF property\n"); > > It may be not only OF :-) Btw, can you compare this approach and the below in terms of bloat-o-meter against the object file size? // can be done without this as well, just the same string as a parameter const char *propname; propname = "maxim,constant-current-disable"; ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, propname, &outconf); if (ret && (ret != -EINVAL)) return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to read %s device property\n", propname); While the above is strong hint to the compiler, the below should give similar result but by the duplicates elimination: ret = device_property_read_u32(dev, "maxim,constant-current-disable", &outconf); if (ret && (ret != -EINVAL)) return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "Failed to read %s device property\n", "maxim,constant-current-disable"); -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
