Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-175984-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 18:55:19 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
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 v2] media: ipu-bridge: fix error code in ipu_bridge_init()
Message-ID: <Zj5DZ4ORVfeCZSsV@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <f468c4ac-0629-41b5-b5d1-e26f70e44800@moroto.mountain>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f468c4ac-0629-41b5-b5d1-e26f70e44800@moroto.mountain>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo

On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 06:43:31PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Return -EINVAL if "bridge->n_sensors == 0".  Don't return success.

LGTM, but I leave the main Q "Is it really the error case?" to the maintainers.
I would imagine the use case where either from the following may happen:
1) the sensors are all new and not listed as supported;
2) there no sensors connected for real.

In both cases I don't see this as a critical error that we can't enumerate
the bridge itself.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko