From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] i2c: i801: avoid panic if ioreamp fails Date: Fri, 10 May 2019 14:18:33 +0200 Message-ID: <20190510141833.2cb3d108@endymion> References: <20190510030320.109154-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <20190510030320.109154-3-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> <20190510100955.497a1a57@endymion> <164bb498-35dc-b226-4adb-3d743f4790a1@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <164bb498-35dc-b226-4adb-3d743f4790a1@huawei.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Kefeng Wang Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Hulk Robot List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 10 May 2019 17:35:46 +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > On 2019/5/10 16:09, Jean Delvare wrote: > > We don't need this anyway. The comment says it can't fail, so why > > bother checking for a condition which will never happen? > > The ioremap could fails due to no memory, our inner test robot(enable FAULT_INJECTION) > > find this issue. The code only runs on x86 where this specific memory segment is standardized for the purpose. That's how we know it "can't fail". That being said, maybe it could fail for other reasons (internal kernel bug, or bogus BIOS maybe), and I don't care adding the check anyway, as this code path is not performance critical. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support