On 9/1/20 17:21, Lukasz Stelmach wrote:

It was <2020-08-25 wto 21:06>, when Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:

quoted

On 8/21/20 18:13, Łukasz Stelmach wrote:

quoted

Check return values in prepare_dma() and s3c64xx_spi_config() and
propagate errors upwards.

Signed-off-by: Łukasz Stelmach<l.stelmach@samsung.com>
---
   drivers/spi/spi-s3c64xx.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

quoted

@@ -298,12 +299,24 @@ static void prepare_dma(struct s3c64xx_spi_dma_data *dma,
     	desc = dmaengine_prep_slave_sg(dma->ch, sgt->sgl, sgt->nents,
   				       dma->direction, DMA_PREP_INTERRUPT);
+	if (!desc) {
+		dev_err(&sdd->pdev->dev, "unable to prepare %s scatterlist",
+			dma->direction == DMA_DEV_TO_MEM ? "rx" : "tx");
+		return -ENOMEM;
+	}
     	desc->callback = s3c64xx_spi_dmacb;
   	desc->callback_param = dma;
     	dma->cookie = dmaengine_submit(desc);
+	ret = dma_submit_error(dma->cookie);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err(&sdd->pdev->dev, "DMA submission failed");
+		return -EIO;

Just return the error value from dma_submit_error() here?

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
static inline int dma_submit_error(dma_cookie_t cookie)
{
         return cookie < 0 ? cookie : 0;

}
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Not quite meaningful IMHO, is it?

dma_submit_error() returns 0 or an error code, I think it makes sense
to propagate that error code rather than replacing it with -EIO.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel