Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 3 Aug 2024, Guilherme Giacomo Simoes wrote: > > > I can see that the function pci_hp_add_brigde have a int return propagation. > > typo in function name. Add parenthesis after function names like this: > pci_hp_add_bridge() > > > But in the drivers that pci_hp_add_bridge is called, your return never is > > cheked. > > checked. > > > This make me a think that the add bridge for pci hotplug drivers is not crucial > > for functionaly and your failed only should show a message in logs. > > functionality > > > > > Then, I maked this patch for remove your return propagation for this moment. > > Please write the commit message using imperative tone. Don't use "I", > "me", "you", "your", or "we" at all. > > Also, you need to signoff your patches (please read > Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst). > > The lack of return value checking seems to be on the list in > pci_hp_add_bridge(). So perhaps the right course of action would be to > handle return values correctly. > > -- > i. > Ok, so if the right course is for the driver to handle return value, then this is a task for the driver developers, because only they know what to do when pci_hp_add_bridge() doesn't work correctly, right?
