Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-134987-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-368-gc733b1d8df-fm-20240402.001-gc733b1d8
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <b08dbd71-b5b1-41aa-847e-46149dda2ab7@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZgLpyDIsHThTT_KG@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20240326145733.3413024-1-arnd@kernel.org>
 <ZgLpyDIsHThTT_KG@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2024 10:02:15 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To: "Andy Shevchenko" <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
 "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
 "Luis Chamberlain" <mcgrof@kernel.org>, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org,
 "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@kernel.dk>,
 "Ricardo B. Marliere" <ricardo@marliere.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v3] module: don't ignore sysfs_create_link() failures
Content-Type: text/plain

On Tue, Mar 26, 2024, at 16:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 26, 2024 at 03:57:18PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>> 
>> The sysfs_create_link() return code is marked as __must_check, but the
>> module_add_driver() function tries hard to not care, by assigning the
>> return code to a variable. When building with 'make W=1', gcc still
>> warns because this variable is only assigned but not used:
>> 
>> drivers/base/module.c: In function 'module_add_driver':
>> drivers/base/module.c:36:6: warning: variable 'no_warn' set but not used [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
>> 
>> Rework the code to properly unwind and return the error code to the
>> caller. My reading of the original code was that it tries to
>> not fail when the links already exist, so keep ignoring -EEXIST
>> errors.
>
>> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>> Cc: linux-modules@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
>
> Wondering if you can move these to be after --- to avoid polluting commit
> message. This will have the same effect and be archived on lore. But on
> pros side it will unload the commit message(s) from unneeded noise.

Done

>
>> +	error = module_add_driver(drv->owner, drv);
>> +	if (error) {
>> +		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: failed to create module links for %s\n",
>> +			__func__, drv->name);
>
> What's wrong with pr_err()? Even if it's not a style used, in a new pieces of
> code this can be improved beforehand. So, we will reduce a technical debt, and
> not adding to it.

I think that would be more confusing, and would rather keep the
style consistent. There is no practical difference here.

>> +int module_add_driver(struct module *mod, struct device_driver *drv)
>>  {
>>  	char *driver_name;
>> -	int no_warn;
>> +	int ret;
>
> I would move it...
>
>>  	struct module_kobject *mk = NULL;
>
> ...to be here.

Done

     Arnd