From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2517C71156 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:34:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7BF03208FE for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:34:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7BF03208FE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CmtzS3sNpzDqfy for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 22:34:44 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cmtq96DnlzDrM1 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 22:27:33 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ellerman.id.au header.i=@ellerman.id.au header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=201909 header.b=fZP6igB0; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Cmtq71dWPz9sW0; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 22:27:29 +1100 (AEDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ellerman.id.au; s=201909; t=1606994852; bh=DhZJx6VS2S3i6rp5eGQb6lMVR2DlQIxOHgVG1xjGFrE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=fZP6igB0dffXJpVPcdAMjoblQ8MgiPxVagbU9j32aVvdtENZ340u7asmb/zevIMam 0Zljjs9YIrqkIlnKZNVdDT3NCKBiIziUjE/G02oMM1J4m1sbKNebe4IpqGKedl8RAl wU3n3OS6J1yqIJPH3Bqdx9iUtYQbs6Os7HVLNgJnO3GdxCQq3KYZC6ZG8wehxxixcr JXHk6z0kY89GyKR60cUw2IYC7ReC5nPHHRs4ESewl/BBx98TlPWJvt21tXRj3BqsPy THBPRrHyz/KN9pSs65pYUw6EGble1woG2YzV7nYVM6C9R1AvLrCykcMzvNV+MlRVnU V7fkwXYOLHmfg== From: Michael Ellerman To: Borislav Petkov , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC, mv64x60: Fix error return code in mv64x60_pci_err_probe() In-Reply-To: <20201202112515.GC2951@zn.tnic> References: <20201124063009.1529-1-bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com> <20201202112515.GC2951@zn.tnic> Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2020 22:27:25 +1100 Message-ID: <87pn3ruo2q.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: cj.chengjian@huawei.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Wang ShaoBo , james.morse@arm.com, huawei.libin@huawei.com, mchehab@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-edac@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Borislav Petkov writes: > On Tue, Nov 24, 2020 at 02:30:09PM +0800, Wang ShaoBo wrote: >> Fix to return -ENODEV error code when edac_pci_add_device() failed instaed >> of 0 in mv64x60_pci_err_probe(), as done elsewhere in this function. >> >> Fixes: 4f4aeeabc061 ("drivers-edac: add marvell mv64x60 driver") >> Signed-off-by: Wang ShaoBo >> --- >> drivers/edac/mv64x60_edac.c | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/edac/mv64x60_edac.c b/drivers/edac/mv64x60_edac.c >> index 3c68bb525d5d..456b9ca1fe8d 100644 >> --- a/drivers/edac/mv64x60_edac.c >> +++ b/drivers/edac/mv64x60_edac.c >> @@ -168,6 +168,7 @@ static int mv64x60_pci_err_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> if (edac_pci_add_device(pci, pdata->edac_idx) > 0) { >> edac_dbg(3, "failed edac_pci_add_device()\n"); >> + res = -ENODEV; >> goto err; >> } > > That driver depends on MV64X60 and I don't see anything in the tree > enabling it and I can't select it AFAICT: > > config MV64X60 > bool > select PPC_INDIRECT_PCI > select CHECK_CACHE_COHERENCY It was selected by PPC_C2K, but that was dropped in: 92c8c16f3457 ("powerpc/embedded6xx: Remove C2K board support") > PPC folks, what do we do here? > > If not used anymore, I'd love to have one less EDAC driver. It's dead code, so drop it. I can send a patch if no one else wants to. cheers