From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH] input: gpio_keys_polled: Correct check for invalid gpiod Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 11:54:02 -0800 Message-ID: <20160222195402.GA28343@dtor-ws> References: <1455876273-5913-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f174.google.com ([209.85.192.174]:33515 "EHLO mail-pf0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754744AbcBVTyG (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2016 14:54:06 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1455876273-5913-1-git-send-email-geert+renesas@glider.be> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Aaron Lu , Mika Westerberg , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 11:04:33AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > At this point in gpio_keys_polled_probe(), button->gpiod contains either > a pointer to a GPIO descriptor or NULL, because: > - gpio_keys_polled_get_devtree_pdata() fills in button->gpiod only if > devm_get_gpiod_from_child() succeeded, > - gpio_to_desc() returns NULL on failure, not an ERR_PTR(), > - button->gpiod is untouched if it was NULL, and button->gpio is not > valid. > > Hence check for NULL only, and return -EINVAL on failure. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > --- > Question: Should it return -ENOENT instead? > > next-20160219:drivers/leds/leds-gpio.c uses -EINVAL, too. > --- > drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c > index 62bdb1d48c49dbd9..1ef3c66099a50d72 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c > +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/gpio_keys_polled.c > @@ -330,8 +330,8 @@ static int gpio_keys_polled_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > button->gpiod = gpio_to_desc(button->gpio); > } > > - if (IS_ERR(button->gpiod)) > - return PTR_ERR(button->gpiod); > + if (!button->gpiod) > + return -EINVAL; I wonder if we should move this check into body of if (!button->gpiod && gpio_is_valid(button->gpio)) { ... } Thanks. -- Dmitry