Hi,
On 01/03/2024 10:46, Sakari Ailus wrote:
Hi Markus,
On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 08:46:25AM +0100, Markus Elfring wrote:
From: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 08:23:24 +0100
Avoid the specification of a duplicate fwnode_handle_put() call
in this function implementation.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c b/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
index ffe5f25f8647..eb708ed7b56e 100644
--- a/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
+++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ds90ub960.c
@@ -3486,10 +3486,7 @@ static int ub960_parse_dt_rxports(struct ub960_data *priv)
}
}
- fwnode_handle_put(links_fwnode);
-
- return 0;
-
+ ret = 0;
I think it'd be nicer to initialise ret as zero, then you can just drop the
assignment above.
I don't like successful execution entering error paths. That's why
there's the return 0.
Tomi
err_put_links:
fwnode_handle_put(links_fwnode);
