Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753198AbbKXHmW (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:42:22 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f52.google.com ([209.85.220.52]:34662 "EHLO mail-pa0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752228AbbKXHmS (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:42:18 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 13:12:12 +0530 From: Sudip Mukherjee To: Eduardo Valentin Cc: Zhang Rui , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: ti-soc-thermal: fix error check Message-ID: <20151124074211.GB18880@sudip-pc> References: <1448283281-21402-1-git-send-email-sudipm.mukherjee@gmail.com> <20151123232542.GA6815@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151123232542.GA6815@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1697 Lines: 40 On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:25:43PM -0800, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 06:24:41PM +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote: > > We were only checking if data is not NULL but > > ti_bandgap_get_sensor_data() can return NULL or ERR_PTR. > > Do you have a fail case? Can you please send the logs too? > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sudip Mukherjee > > --- > > drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c > > index b213a12..d76bb7c 100644 > > --- a/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c > > +++ b/drivers/thermal/ti-soc-thermal/ti-thermal-common.c > > @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ int ti_thermal_remove_sensor(struct ti_bandgap *bgp, int id) > > > > data = ti_bandgap_get_sensor_data(bgp, id); > > > > - if (data && data->ti_thermal) { > > + if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(data) && data->ti_thermal) { > > I don t really see the need for this as we always > ti_bandgap_set_sensor_data with a valid pointer, never with a ERR PTR. > So, it would be either valid or NULL. ERR_PTR is not coming from ti_bandgap_set_sensor_data(). In ti_bandgap_get_sensor_data() if ti_bandgap_validate() fails then it returns ERR_PTR(ret). So just by checking for NULL we are not checking for any error return from ti_bandgap_validate(). regards sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/