[PATCH net-next] net/qla3xxx: fix an error code in ql_adapter_up()

The ql_wait_for_drvr_lock() fails and returns false, then this
function should return an error code instead of returning success.

Fixes: 5a4faa873782 ("[PATCH net-next] qla3xxx NIC driver")
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qla3xxx.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qla3xxx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qla3xxx.c
index 1e6d72adfe43..0642cc27094b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qla3xxx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qlogic/qla3xxx.c

@@ -3480,20 +3480,20 @@ static int ql_adapter_up(struct ql3_adapter *qdev)
 
 	spin_lock_irqsave(&qdev->hw_lock, hw_flags);
 
-	err = ql_wait_for_drvr_lock(qdev);
-	if (err) {
-		err = ql_adapter_initialize(qdev);
-		if (err) {
-			netdev_err(ndev, "Unable to initialize adapter\n");
-			goto err_init;
-		}
-		netdev_err(ndev, "Releasing driver lock\n");
-		ql_sem_unlock(qdev, QL_DRVR_SEM_MASK);
-	} else {
+	if (!ql_wait_for_drvr_lock(qdev)) {
 		netdev_err(ndev, "Could not acquire driver lock\n");
+		err = -ENODEV;
 		goto err_lock;
 	}
 
+	err = ql_adapter_initialize(qdev);
+	if (err) {
+		netdev_err(ndev, "Unable to initialize adapter\n");
+		goto err_init;
+	}
+	netdev_err(ndev, "Releasing driver lock\n");
+	ql_sem_unlock(qdev, QL_DRVR_SEM_MASK);
+
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&qdev->hw_lock, hw_flags);
 
 	set_bit(QL_ADAPTER_UP, &qdev->flags);

-- 
2.20.1

I had intended to put [PATCH net] in the subject.  Although it's not a
high priority bug so net-next is fine too.

regards,
dan carpenter

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:10:25 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote:

I had intended to put [PATCH net] in the subject.  Although it's not a
high priority bug so net-next is fine too.

Looks like it's marked 'Changes Requested' in pw. The Fixes tag is also
incorrect (the subject does not match, there's a [PATCH] in it, which
seems to have been replaced by [PATCH net-next]). 

Would you mind reposting?

On Mon, Dec 06, 2021 at 04:54:03PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:10:25 +0300 Dan Carpenter wrote:

quoted

I had intended to put [PATCH net] in the subject.  Although it's not a
high priority bug so net-next is fine too.

Looks like it's marked 'Changes Requested' in pw. The Fixes tag is also
incorrect (the subject does not match, there's a [PATCH] in it, which
seems to have been replaced by [PATCH net-next]). 

Would you mind reposting?

Doh!

I will repost.

regards,
dan carpenter