On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 04:50:38PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> now that we are monitoring the return value from attach, make the
> required changes to return proper value from its attach function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c
> index a1fac5a..761a775 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c
> @@ -160,14 +160,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_irq(void *data)
> "SMBus alert received but no ARA client!\n");
> }
>
> -static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port)
> +static int i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port)
> {
> struct i2c_par *adapter;
>
> adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(struct i2c_par), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (adapter == NULL) {
> printk(KERN_ERR "i2c-parport: Failed to kzalloc\n");
> - return;
> + return -ENOMEM;
ENOMEM does not need printout. Please remove printk while we are here.
>
> pr_debug("i2c-parport: attaching to %s\n", port->name);
> @@ -230,13 +230,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port)
> mutex_lock(&adapter_list_lock);
> list_add_tail(&adapter->node, &adapter_list);
> mutex_unlock(&adapter_list_lock);
> - return;
> + return 0;
>
> err_unregister:
> parport_release(adapter->pdev);
> parport_unregister_device(adapter->pdev);
> err_free:
> kfree(adapter);
> + return -ENODEV;
Ideally, we would return different -Esomething for each failing case. We
can leave that for someone who is acutally using the driver. However, I
wonder if ENODEV is a proper catch-all case because the driver core will
not report failures.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
