On 28/08/2024 11:45, Yan Zhen wrote:
> Switch to use dev_err_probe() to simplify the error path and
> unify a message template.
>
> Using this helper is totally fine even if err is known to never
> be -EPROBE_DEFER.
>
> The benefit compared to a normal dev_err() is the standardized format
> of the error code, it being emitted symbolically and the fact that
> the error code is returned which allows more compact error paths.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yan Zhen <yanzhen@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/media/i2c/max2175.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/max2175.c b/drivers/media/i2c/max2175.c
> index bf02ca23a284..700a70a6cee3 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/i2c/max2175.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/max2175.c
> @@ -1299,9 +1299,8 @@ static int max2175_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> ret = max2175_refout_load_to_bits(client, refout_load,
> &refout_bits);
> if (ret) {
> - dev_err(&client->dev, "invalid refout_load %u\n",
> - refout_load);
Another example, one of many from @vivo.com, where you touch one line
and leave everything else not modified.
Are you going to send 5 different patches - one per each line? You
generate tremendous amount of work for reviewers to handle this.
Since ~2 weeks there is tremendous amount of trivial patches coming from
vivo.com. I identified at least 6 buggy, where the contributor did not
understand the code. Not sure about intention, but I advise extra
carefulness when dealing with these "trivial" improvements (because we
tend to apply things which look trivial).
Best regards,
Krzysztof
