| Message ID | 1428492040-5581-13-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 04:50:38PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > now that we are monitoring the return value from attach, make the > required changes to return proper value from its attach function. > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> > --- > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > index a1fac5a..761a775 100644 > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > @@ -160,14 +160,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_irq(void *data) > "SMBus alert received but no ARA client!\n"); > } > > -static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > +static int i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > { > struct i2c_par *adapter; > > adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(struct i2c_par), GFP_KERNEL); > if (adapter == NULL) { > printk(KERN_ERR "i2c-parport: Failed to kzalloc\n"); > - return; > + return -ENOMEM; ENOMEM does not need printout. Please remove printk while we are here. > > pr_debug("i2c-parport: attaching to %s\n", port->name); > @@ -230,13 +230,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > mutex_lock(&adapter_list_lock); > list_add_tail(&adapter->node, &adapter_list); > mutex_unlock(&adapter_list_lock); > - return; > + return 0; > > err_unregister: > parport_release(adapter->pdev); > parport_unregister_device(adapter->pdev); > err_free: > kfree(adapter); > + return -ENODEV; Ideally, we would return different -Esomething for each failing case. We can leave that for someone who is acutally using the driver. However, I wonder if ENODEV is a proper catch-all case because the driver core will not report failures.
On Thu, 9 Apr 2015 09:13:07 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Wed, Apr 08, 2015 at 04:50:38PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > now that we are monitoring the return value from attach, make the > > required changes to return proper value from its attach function. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c | 7 ++++--- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > > index a1fac5a..761a775 100644 > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c > > @@ -160,14 +160,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_irq(void *data) > > "SMBus alert received but no ARA client!\n"); > > } > > > > -static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > > +static int i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > > { > > struct i2c_par *adapter; > > > > adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(struct i2c_par), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (adapter == NULL) { > > printk(KERN_ERR "i2c-parport: Failed to kzalloc\n"); > > - return; > > + return -ENOMEM; > > ENOMEM does not need printout. Please remove printk while we are here. > > > > > pr_debug("i2c-parport: attaching to %s\n", port->name); > > @@ -230,13 +230,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) > > mutex_lock(&adapter_list_lock); > > list_add_tail(&adapter->node, &adapter_list); > > mutex_unlock(&adapter_list_lock); > > - return; > > + return 0; > > > > err_unregister: > > parport_release(adapter->pdev); > > parport_unregister_device(adapter->pdev); > > err_free: > > kfree(adapter); > > + return -ENODEV; > > Ideally, we would return different -Esomething for each failing case. We > can leave that for someone who is acutally using the driver. However, I > wonder if ENODEV is a proper catch-all case because the driver core will > not report failures. It doesn't really matter that the error codes are different, it matters that they are meaningful. As much as possible you should pass error codes from the lower layers. parport_claim_or_block() and i2c_bit_add_bus() return proper error codes so you should record and transmit them. Only parport_register_device() does not, so you have to craft one and -ENODEV seems appropriate to me. Note: I can test this driver.
> It doesn't really matter that the error codes are different, it matters > that they are meaningful. As much as possible you should pass error > codes from the lower layers. parport_claim_or_block() and > i2c_bit_add_bus() return proper error codes so you should record and > transmit them. Oh, surely yes. I assumed they don't and this series is a first step to fix this. Should have looked myself. Thanks for jumping in here.
On Thu, Apr 09, 2015 at 12:25:28PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > It doesn't really matter that the error codes are different, it matters > > that they are meaningful. As much as possible you should pass error > > codes from the lower layers. parport_claim_or_block() and > > i2c_bit_add_bus() return proper error codes so you should record and > > transmit them. > > Oh, surely yes. I assumed they don't and this series is a first step to > fix this. Should have looked myself. Thanks for jumping in here. > I planned this series to be the first step to fix the attach function which does not return it succeeded or failed. And if attach has failed then there is no reason that module_init will report success. But as Greg pointed out that the first step should be to bring the parallel port in the driver model. I am working on that now, I will post a v2 of this series once that modification is done, and that will need extensive testing. regards sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c index a1fac5a..761a775 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c @@ -160,14 +160,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_irq(void *data) "SMBus alert received but no ARA client!\n"); } -static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) +static int i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) { struct i2c_par *adapter; adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(struct i2c_par), GFP_KERNEL); if (adapter == NULL) { printk(KERN_ERR "i2c-parport: Failed to kzalloc\n"); - return; + return -ENOMEM; } pr_debug("i2c-parport: attaching to %s\n", port->name); @@ -230,13 +230,14 @@ static void i2c_parport_attach(struct parport *port) mutex_lock(&adapter_list_lock); list_add_tail(&adapter->node, &adapter_list); mutex_unlock(&adapter_list_lock); - return; + return 0; err_unregister: parport_release(adapter->pdev); parport_unregister_device(adapter->pdev); err_free: kfree(adapter); + return -ENODEV; } static void i2c_parport_detach(struct parport *port)
now that we are monitoring the return value from attach, make the required changes to return proper value from its attach function. Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee <sudip@vectorindia.org> --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-parport.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)