On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 7:56 AM, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 20:46:49 +0100 > >> Error code returned by 'bnxt_read_sfp_module_eeprom_info()' is handled a >> few lines above when reading the A0 portion of the EEPROM. >> The same should be done when reading the A2 portion of the EEPROM. >> >> In order to correctly propagate an error, update 'rc' in this 2nd call as >> well, otherwise 0 (success) is returned. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Patch applied, thanks Chrisophe. > > I cannot see any legitimate reason to ignore errors returned here, as > an error would mean a partial read back of the data to the caller. Sorry I was on vacation and missed this earlier. The reason we don't check for errors in the 2nd part is that the 2nd page may not be present on some eeproms. But I think the patch is fine because we return the proper length in .get_module_info(). So we will now return error only if the user specifies an invalid length, which is fine. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
