Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 14:18:04 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        Andreas Noever <andreas.noever@gmail.com>,
        Michael Jamet <michael.jamet@intel.com>,
        Yehezkel Bernat <YehezkelShB@gmail.com>,
        Rajmohan Mani <rajmohan.mani@intel.com>,
        Nicholas Johnson <nicholas.johnson-opensource@outlook.com.au>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>,
        Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        Mario.Limonciello@dell.com,
        Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@canonical.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/22] thunderbolt: Log warning if adding switch fails
Message-ID: <20191001121804.GC2951658@kroah.com>
References: <20191001113830.13028-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
 <20191001113830.13028-4-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20191001113830.13028-4-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 02:38:11PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> If we fail to add a switch for some reason log a warning with the error
> code. This is useful for debugging.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c b/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c
> index 1f7a9e1cc09c..541295be9bfc 100644
> --- a/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c
> +++ b/drivers/thunderbolt/tb.c
> @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static void tb_scan_port(struct tb_port *port)
>  	struct tb_cm *tcm = tb_priv(port->sw->tb);
>  	struct tb_port *upstream_port;
>  	struct tb_switch *sw;
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	if (tb_is_upstream_port(port))
>  		return;
> @@ -203,7 +204,9 @@ static void tb_scan_port(struct tb_port *port)
>  	if (!tcm->hotplug_active)
>  		dev_set_uevent_suppress(&sw->dev, true);
>  
> -	if (tb_switch_add(sw)) {
> +	ret = tb_switch_add(sw);
> +	if (ret) {
> +		dev_warn(&sw->dev, "failed to register switch: %d\n", ret);

Shouldn't tb_switch_add() do the error reporting instead?  That way it
makes it easier to call functions and not always have to print failure
messages :)

thanks,

greg k-h