On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 09:51:02AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The acpi_node_get_property_reference() doesn't return ACPI error codes,
> it just returns regular negative kernel error codes. This patch doesn't
> affect run time, it's just a clean up.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/phy/sfp.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
> index a991c80e6567..8a99307c1c39 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/sfp.c
> @@ -1848,7 +1848,7 @@ static int sfp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> int ret;
>
> ret = acpi_node_get_property_reference(fw, "i2c-bus", 0, &args);
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(ret) || !is_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode)) {
> + if (ret || !is_acpi_device_node(args.fwnode)) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "missing 'i2c-bus' property\n");
> return -ENODEV;
If "ret" is a Linux error code, should we print its value when reporting
the error so we know why the failure occurred, and propagate the error
code?
> }
> --
> 2.20.1
>
>
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 12.1Mbps down 622kbps up
According to speedtest.net: 11.9Mbps down 500kbps up
