Re: [PATCH] leds: st1202: Fix an error handling path in st1202_probe()

[Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2025, Christophe JAILLET wrote:

> Le 20/02/2025 à 16:58, Lee Jones a écrit :
> > On Wed, 19 Feb 2025, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> > 
> > > devm_mutex_init() may return -ENOMEM.
> > > So this error should be handled in st1202_probe().
> > 
> > The start of a new sentence shouldn't warrant a line break.
> > 
> > > Fixes: 259230378c65 ("leds: Add LED1202 I2C driver")
> > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/leds/leds-st1202.c | 5 ++++-
> > >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/leds/leds-st1202.c b/drivers/leds/leds-st1202.c
> > > index b691c4886993..4fc17d518292 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/leds/leds-st1202.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/leds/leds-st1202.c
> > > @@ -356,7 +356,10 @@ static int st1202_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> > >   	if (!chip)
> > >   		return -ENOMEM;
> > > -	devm_mutex_init(&client->dev, &chip->lock);
> > > +	ret = devm_mutex_init(&client->dev, &chip->lock);
> > > +	if (ret < 0)
> > 
> > My assumption is that anything but 0 would be bad, thus:
> > 
> > 	if (ret)
> 
> Matter of taste. All other tests in this driver are "if (ret < 0)" or "if
> (ret != 0)".
> 
> What do you prefer: consistency or concision? (my own choice goes to
> consistency)
> 
> If you confirm concision, I'll send a v2 that also fix your other comment
> above.

Ah, I just attempted to apply the patch, but it looks like it's already
fixed in ("leds: st1202: Check for error code from devm_mutex_init()
call").

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]