Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1334836
| From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value |
| Date | 2016-02-15 22:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r2yIO-6Cx-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r2ucb-3qG-61@gated-at.bofh.it> <r2ucb-3qG-59@gated-at.bofh.it> <r2y66-68b-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Monday 15 February 2016 21:56:42 Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> We are currently required to do two checks for regulator pointer:
>> IS_ERR() and IS_NULL().
>>
>> And multiple instances are reported, about both of these not being used
>> consistently and so resulting in crashes.
>>
>> Fix that by initializing regulator pointer with an error value and
>> checking it only against an error.
>>
>> This makes code consistent and efficient.
>
> There is usually something else wrong if you have to check for both.
> Why exactly do you need to check for both IS_ERR and NULL?
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c b/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
>> index d7cd4e265766..146b6197d598 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/power/opp/core.c
>> @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ unsigned long dev_pm_opp_get_max_volt_latency(struct device *dev)
>> }
>>
>> reg = dev_opp->regulator;
>> - if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(reg)) {
>> + if (IS_ERR(reg)) {
>> /* Regulator may not be required for device */
>> if (reg)
>> dev_err(dev, "%s: Invalid regulator (%ld)\n", __func__,
>> @@ -798,6 +798,9 @@ static struct device_opp *_add_device_opp(struct device *dev)
>> of_node_put(np);
>> }
>>
>> + /* Set regulator to a non-NULL error value */
>> + dev_opp->regulator = ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
>> +
>> /* Find clk for the device */
>> dev_opp->clk = clk_get(dev, NULL);
>> if (IS_ERR(dev_opp->clk)) {
>
> -EFAULT has a very specific meaning (accessing an invalid pointer from
> user space), I don't think you want that one.
Yeah, agreed.
That should be something like -ENXIO IMO.
Thanks,
Rafael
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-02-15 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-02-15 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com> - 2016-02-15 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-15 21:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org> - 2016-02-15 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-02-16 01:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2016-02-16 01:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> - 2016-02-16 02:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-02-16 03:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-16 10:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-02-16 14:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> - 2016-02-16 16:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Initialize regulator pointer to an error value Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> - 2016-02-16 18:00 +0100
csiph-web