Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] staging: r8188eu: add error handling of rtw_read8

Pavel Skripkin
2022-06-06T18:57:45Z

Hi Greg,

On 6/6/22 08:48, Greg KH wrote:
>> - rtw_read8(padapter, REG_FMETHR);
>> + /* FIXME: should this read be removed? */
>> + res = rtw_read8(padapter, REG_FMETHR, &reg);
>> + (void)res;
>
> What is that? We don't do "empty" lines like this in the kernel for no
> good reason. If the return value must be checked, then that's fine, but
> don't do it this way. Shouldn't the function itself return an error?
>
> And reading a value is sometimes required by hardware in order to have
> the write call go through. But that's for PCI devices, not normally USB
> devices, but we could be wrong. I wouldn't put a FIXME in here unless
> you have some plan for how to eventually solve it, otherwise someone
> might just drop it without knowing why the FIXME was ever added.
>
>

Ok, I will just make this function return an error. Thanks

[snip]

>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/HalPhyRf_8188e.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/HalPhyRf_8188e.c
>> index b944c8071a3b..a5b7980dfcee 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/HalPhyRf_8188e.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/HalPhyRf_8188e.c
>> @@ -463,6 +463,7 @@ void _PHY_SaveADDARegisters(struct adapter *adapt, u32 *ADDAReg, u32 *ADDABackup
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +/* FIXME: return an error to caller */
>
> When are these FIXME going to be resolved? I don't like adding them for
> no good reason.
>

After this series will go in. I really don't want to make this series
huge, since ideally read errors should be passed up to callers. This
driver has a lot of very deep call-chains, so fixing them in one series
is just unreal

I have a plan to address these FIXMEs, that's why I've planted them.

thanks for review,

With regards,
Pavel Skripkin