We should set the error code here. Otherwise static checkers complain.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
index 984e816..68e7c0d 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
@@ -491,6 +491,7 @@ int fsl_rio_setup(struct platform_device *dev)
rmu_node = of_parse_phandle(dev->dev.of_node, "fsl,srio-rmu-handle", 0);
if (!rmu_node) {
dev_err(&dev->dev, "No valid fsl,srio-rmu-handle property\n");
+ rc = -ENOENT;
goto err_rmu;
}
rc = of_address_to_resource(rmu_node, 0, &rmu_regs);On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 08:35:25 +0300 Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:
We should set the error code here. Otherwise static checkers complain.
hm.
quoted hunk
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
@@ -491,6 +491,7 @@ int fsl_rio_setup(struct platform_device *dev)
rmu_node = of_parse_phandle(dev->dev.of_node, "fsl,srio-rmu-handle", 0);
if (!rmu_node) {
dev_err(&dev->dev, "No valid fsl,srio-rmu-handle property\n");
+ rc = -ENOENT;
goto err_rmu;
}
rc = of_address_to_resource(rmu_node, 0, &rmu_regs);
afaict the function will return 0 in this case, which is a flat out
bug. But why do static checkers complain? The code will return a
suitably initialized value?
IOW, please always quote the checker/compiler output when fixing a bug!
On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 01:16:00PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 08:35:25 +0300 Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
We should set the error code here. Otherwise static checkers complain.
hm.
quoted
--- a/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/sysdev/fsl_rio.c
@@ -491,6 +491,7 @@ int fsl_rio_setup(struct platform_device *dev)
rmu_node = of_parse_phandle(dev->dev.of_node, "fsl,srio-rmu-handle", 0);
if (!rmu_node) {
dev_err(&dev->dev, "No valid fsl,srio-rmu-handle property\n");
+ rc = -ENOENT;
goto err_rmu;
}
rc = of_address_to_resource(rmu_node, 0, &rmu_regs);
afaict the function will return 0 in this case, which is a flat out
bug. But why do static checkers complain? The code will return a
suitably initialized value?
IOW, please always quote the checker/compiler output when fixing a bug!
Coccinelle has a check for missing error codes and I'm working on one
for Smatch as well.
regards,
dan carpenter