From: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 22:15:25 +0100
Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this function.
This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
---
drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c b/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
index 6af4ec3c88c3..ce3d6674ef80 100644
--- a/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
+++ b/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
@@ -901,7 +901,6 @@ static int sata_dwc_port_start(struct ata_port *ap)
/* Allocate Port Struct */
hsdevp = kzalloc(sizeof(*hsdevp), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!hsdevp) {
- dev_err(ap->dev, "%s: kmalloc failed for hsdevp\n", __func__);
err = -ENOMEM;
goto CLEANUP;
}
--
2.16.1
On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 22:22 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> From: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 22:15:25 +0100
>
> Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this
> function.
>
> This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
Tejun, it's up to you. In case you are fine with the change,
Acked-by: Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
> b/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
> index 6af4ec3c88c3..ce3d6674ef80 100644
> --- a/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
> +++ b/drivers/ata/sata_dwc_460ex.c
> @@ -901,7 +901,6 @@ static int sata_dwc_port_start(struct ata_port
> *ap)
> /* Allocate Port Struct */
> hsdevp = kzalloc(sizeof(*hsdevp), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!hsdevp) {
> - dev_err(ap->dev, "%s: kmalloc failed for hsdevp\n",
> __func__);
> err = -ENOMEM;
> goto CLEANUP;
> }
--
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Intel Finland Oy
On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:39:13AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 22:22 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > From: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
> > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 22:15:25 +0100
> >
> > Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this
> > function.
> >
> > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
>
> Tejun, it's up to you. In case you are fine with the change,
Yeah, these are marginal at best and one may be able to argue that
emitting a message with device identifier is still useful but these
allocations are order-zero and can't fail to begin with, so...
Thanks.
--
tejun
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 3:22 PM, Tejun Heo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:39:13AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 22:22 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
>> > From: Markus Elfring <[email protected]>
>> > Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 22:15:25 +0100
>> >
>> > Omit an extra message for a memory allocation failure in this
>> > function.
>> >
>> > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software.
>>
>> Tejun, it's up to you. In case you are fine with the change,
>
> Yeah, these are marginal at best and one may be able to argue that
> emitting a message with device identifier is still useful but these
> allocations are order-zero and can't fail to begin with, so...
IIRC device core prints a warn with error code and device name if
->probe() fails.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko