On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 07:10:54PM +0100, Jerome Brunet wrote:

On Sat 15 Feb 2025 at 07:53, Greg Kroah-Hartman [off-list ref] wrote:

[...]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+							int id)
+{
+	struct auxiliary_device *auxdev;
+	int ret;
+
+	auxdev = kzalloc(sizeof(*auxdev), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!auxdev)
+		return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);

Ick, who cares what the error value really is?  Why not just do NULL or
a valid pointer?  That makes the caller much simpler to handle, right?

Sure why not

I have tried the 'NULL or valid' approach. In the consumers,
which mostly return an integer from their various init function, I got
this weird to come up with one from NULL. EINVAL, ENOMEM, etc ... can't
really pick one.

It is actually easier to pass something along.

Ok, fair enough, thanks for trying.  But I would have returned just
-ENODEV in all cases, as that's what the end result was :)

thanks,

greg k-h