Hi Andy,

On 6/17/22 18:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 7:20 AM Srinivas Neeli
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

In five different instances the return value of "of_property_read_u32"
API was neither captured nor checked.

Fixed it by capturing the return value and then checking for any error.

Signed-off-by: Srinivas Neeli <redacted>
Addresses-Coverity: "check_return"

I think the best course of action here is to go and fix Coverity while
marking these as false positives.

To the idea of castings -- this is not good style and (many?)
maintainers in kernel do not accept such "workaround" for fixing
broken tool.

Let's wait for Linus what he will say about it.
I can't see nothing wrong about declaring that I am intentionally ignoring 
return code.

Thanks,
Michal

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