Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-175945-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 18:27:30 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bingbu Cao <bingbu.cao@intel.com>,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
	Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
	Daniel Scally <dan.scally@ideasonboard.com>,
	linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: ipu-bridge: fix error code in ipu_bridge_init()
Message-ID: <4ade89f8-cbd3-4dbf-81fb-0e9a4269dc0f@moroto.mountain>
References: <71dad56e-0e2f-48ba-90bc-75096112a1ba@moroto.mountain>
 <Zj46vpwTbfde4YX2@smile.fi.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zj46vpwTbfde4YX2@smile.fi.intel.com>

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 06:18:22PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 06:10:37PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > Return -EINVAL if "bridge->n_sensors == 0".  Don't return success.
> 
> ...
> 
> >  	ret = ipu_bridge_connect_sensors(bridge);
> > -	if (ret || bridge->n_sensors == 0)
> > +	if (ret || bridge->n_sensors == 0) {
> > +		ret = ret ?: -EINVAL;
> >  		goto err_unregister_ipu;
> > +	}
> 
> I would split:
> 
> 	ret = ipu_bridge_connect_sensors(bridge);
> 	if (ret)
> 		goto err_unregister_ipu;
> 
> 	if (bridge->n_sensors == 0) {
> 		ret = -EINVAL;
> 		goto err_unregister_ipu;
> 	}

It's always hard to know which way to go on these...  I wrote it that
way in my first draft.  It's my prefered way as well but not everyone
agrees.  I'll resend.

regards,
dan carpenter