From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (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 4E15A15E81 for ; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:07:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="W/1H7+mx" Received: from mail-wm1-x32f.google.com (mail-wm1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF5DCD64; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 03:07:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-4083cd3917eso5305535e9.3; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 03:07:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1697796433; x=1698401233; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=eg/csZTe11WF84HY2bC30HCtKA95bWgVvxI9p/8afRY=; b=W/1H7+mxcgaW2CIZYzlMcgQmGAkNadgMutA1aQstRAx9seq239n1cCjK/Hb3GePFU7 oTyN5GT+MGBb7uwWj39MSJTqvbVL+rM+zFhdKRTn4KXT3M4uS39UxDxbuQKTCibZEZ79 kDVkcFl3q08PLSlfw9O9SV0KVxz83GGdKedAFdvdA0N2gaPbuU0qDCiSUK1IXeRQUBuJ yClwWAe5ZQJCuN9DuDm19GaHekHy7k+sriVO270bN6Meo6kSbMTTsUp6BKLEqOJcoZ4o rVSQ9BJZ3ZWcbzB6EVwFuAZGQb7sqKloI7CQH9MBWLZtBvY96xKCIOnS1pKVSvdEEUyN i+uA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1697796433; x=1698401233; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=eg/csZTe11WF84HY2bC30HCtKA95bWgVvxI9p/8afRY=; b=MedMJRwlHgNMeTbIGyJX7TKd+FKnmNJVzeuNcNncpKGuT1niv7qr2Qv91CT0to9Onc 1gBe64QnjDfMbKmSqsDeoUL/L9hObYQ62bE1l6uJ5EKXgOKGNqOQpty8tOJbYUgONnp4 DVqAUNmM45moPum67EL9huBX2t92y38EuQe7R0d/bYQEoKrquRQ+6JwBE9bfLwt6eZmJ J2jUL0zHsFVnofyfOFhGFuwzAQKaFydiDKJAZiGvLmS5jKbZjijM5TFnKObetybCGeBY ub3KjOkPTYDxxDQJDZCfElFhFUujs2IWbfBPLE88joK/8VbmH46zSnPfsHK2WNlh5lrU Wn6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywv7/SaSRthovZesJ1yGF8rLM98NW4+/1QyC5FTBRZxYFiPDN76 o89UVSym26DFQUgeY5dN/jY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEqZwxXRL66lw1+cuj95TIKompxhoWp5WEAhk2qvUt3UtBRe+YVmcGEZrYV3uvDzSEbs5b0Rg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:510d:b0:406:53f1:d629 with SMTP id o13-20020a05600c510d00b0040653f1d629mr1084077wms.5.1697796432432; Fri, 20 Oct 2023 03:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from skbuf ([188.26.57.160]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w15-20020a5d608f000000b0032dbf32bd56sm1343204wrt.37.2023.10.20.03.07.11 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 20 Oct 2023 03:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2023 13:07:09 +0300 From: Vladimir Oltean To: Su Hui Cc: andrew@lunn.ch, f.fainelli@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, richardcochran@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: add an error code check in mv88e6352_tai_event_work Message-ID: <20231020100709.yy2ovjm3q2hphek6@skbuf> References: <20231020090003.200092-1-suhui@nfschina.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231020090003.200092-1-suhui@nfschina.com> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 05:00:04PM +0800, Su Hui wrote: > mv88e6xxx_tai_write() can return error code (-EOPNOTSUPP ...) if failed. > So check the value of 'ret' after calling mv88e6xxx_tai_write(). > > Signed-off-by: Su Hui > --- mv88e6xxx_avb_ops :: tai_read() and tai_write() come in pairs for the existing implementations. So, a missing tai_write() method also implies a missing tai_read() and would have been caught by the previous call to mv88e6xxx_tai_read() in this function. But, ok. Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean This is a patch for net-next, as it doesn't fix any user-visible issue and is just an improvement. For future changes, please note your expectation regarding the target tree yourself, by formatting the patch as "[PATCH net-next]".