On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 16-05-18, 16:12, Amit Kucheria wrote:
>> > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(opp_temp =
>> > + dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw(cpu_dev,&versions,1));
>> > + if (0 > ret)
>>
>> Any particular reason to prefer this over (ret < 0) that is generally
>> used? I've seen it used to avoid the == vs. = typos, but not for other
>> comparisons.
>>
>> Suggest sticking to what is commonly used i.e. ret < 0.
>>
>> > + goto free_opp;
>> > +
>> > + cpu_dev = get_cpu_device(GOLD_LEAD);
>>
>> Error check cpu_dev here?
>>
>> > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(opp_temp =
>> > + dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw(cpu_dev,&versions,1));
>> > + if (0 > ret)
>> > + goto free_opp;
>
> The goto here is wrong
>
>> > +
>> > +
>> > + ret = PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(platform_device_register_simple("cpufreq-dt",
>> > + -1, NULL, 0));
>> > +
>> > + if (0 == ret)
>> > + return 0;
>> > +
>> > +free_opp:
>> > + dev_pm_opp_put_supported_hw(opp_temp);
>>
>> This is not needed because dev_pm_opp_set_supported_hw will free
>> memory in case of failure. This call in only needed in case of a
>> successful get.
>
> But this is still required for the case where platform device
> registration fails.
Agreed. The overall error path needs to be re-written with proper
check of return values.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
