Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753161AbdFUCoT (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 22:44:19 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f67.google.com ([209.85.218.67]:34571 "EHLO mail-oi0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752917AbdFUCoR (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Jun 2017 22:44:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170620212234.GA10957@embeddedgus> References: <20170518172223.Horde.5kLLwxMJWThQKv0bAxTsk4D@gator4166.hostgator.com> <20170620212234.GA10957@embeddedgus> From: Ethan Zhao Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 10:44:16 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: intel: e1000e: add check on e1e_wphy() return value To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Cc: Jeff Kirsher , intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev , LKML Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1302 Lines: 36 Gustavo, The return value of ret_val seems used to check if the access to PHY/NVM got its semaphore, generally speaking, it is needed for every PHY access of this driver. Reviewed-by: Ethan Zhao On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:22 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > Check return value from call to e1e_wphy(). This value is being > checked during previous calls to function e1e_wphy() and it seems > a check was missing here. > > Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1226905 > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > index 68ea8b4..d6d4ed7 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/ich8lan.c > @@ -2437,6 +2437,8 @@ static s32 e1000_hv_phy_workarounds_ich8lan(struct e1000_hw *hw) > if (hw->phy.revision < 2) { > e1000e_phy_sw_reset(hw); > ret_val = e1e_wphy(hw, MII_BMCR, 0x3140); > + if (ret_val) > + return ret_val; > } > } > > -- > 2.5.0 >