From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from userp2120.oracle.com (userp2120.oracle.com [156.151.31.85]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8497E5F for ; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (userp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 12R8Kkns195785; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:16 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=hfY4S7MOHrG//pt/CEKfYvC6/MCmtpoxNmI4HZ03R8k=; b=FTF8r1u71IEUn331q5XUjuvSmiq68UKRQmBuNSElmB/jIWBLpu3OLALgoqhA6/W217C2 g0SAj2k2HE5k9aZyrDsV55ink4Wb0tDn5lUDJXU1nO8mqyvnVqQRcpz6NWkRVuH0ADqZ Tdg/hLG8ylBmgRN7QktO+1mevFHeJ/Vpn9S6qUIF3KRb7lwWsrioyL+t7Az4CSTkJYxd 04EjX1xgCxhyl6yt3f3lPefUpsKRL/qWTHhh9brjWaVrUqJmk1rJLA3z76YVXgCqjZjA WPAT7owPL/5EADXbGza1KZaBaAHIGIuZuJeQNUv9ZV0JFDHZsVAU2ynAz3dvCH/EDRHt /Q== Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by userp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 37hwbn84j2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:16 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 12R8FPVL061833; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:14 GMT Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 37htrcysrm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:14 +0000 Received: from abhmp0006.oracle.com (abhmp0006.oracle.com [141.146.116.12]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 12R8LDO1015804; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 08:21:13 GMT Received: from kadam (/102.36.221.92) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sat, 27 Mar 2021 01:21:13 -0700 Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2021 11:21:06 +0300 From: Dan Carpenter To: Edmundo Carmona Antoranz Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, marcocesati@gmail.com, ross.schm.dev@gmail.com, fabioaiuto83@gmail.com, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 6/6] staging: rtl8723bs: sta_mgt: return _FAIL if there is an error Message-ID: <20210327082105.GK1667@kadam> References: <20210327001736.180881-1-eantoranz@gmail.com> <20210327001736.180881-6-eantoranz@gmail.com> X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210327001736.180881-6-eantoranz@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Proofpoint-IMR: 1 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=9935 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2103250000 definitions=main-2103270066 X-Proofpoint-GUID: 6nBGOEu0eFTG02Eir4qZm56lWsR00zOK X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: 6nBGOEu0eFTG02Eir4qZm56lWsR00zOK X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6200 definitions=9935 signatures=668683 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2103250000 definitions=main-2103270066 On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 06:17:36PM -0600, Edmundo Carmona Antoranz wrote: > If there is an error when calling rtw_init_bcmc_stainfo() inside > rtw_init_bcmc_stainfo(), variable res is set to _FAIL. However, when > returning, _SUCCESS is always returned regardless. Just in case, > all existing calls do not consider the result of the function. This more papering over badness. Lets leave it as-is until someone can fix the callers. Static checkers are useful things but if we silence the warnings without fixing the bugs then we are basically going to great effort to write a checker and even more effort to disable the checker. regards, dan carpenter