[U-Boot] [PATCH 2/4] exynos: Fix passing of errors in exynos_mmc_init()

Minkyu Kang
2015-09-23T10:13:31Z

On 23/09/15 18:54, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On 09/23/2015 06:39 PM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
>> Hi Tobias,
>>
>>> exynos_mmc_init() always returns zero, so for the caller
>>> it looks like it never fails.
>>>
>>> Correct this by returning the error code of process_nodes().
>>> For process_nodes() do something similar and return early
>>> when do_sdhci_init() fails.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tobias Jakobi <tjakobi@math.uni-bielefeld.de>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/mmc/s5p_sdhci.c | 10 ++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/s5p_sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/s5p_sdhci.c
>>> index e9c43a9..bc2102a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/s5p_sdhci.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/s5p_sdhci.c
>>> @@ -187,7 +187,11 @@ static int process_nodes(const void *blob, int
>>> node_list[], int count) printf("%s: failed to decode dev
>>> %d\n", __func__, i); return -1;
>>> }
>>> - do_sdhci_init(host);
>>> +
>>> + if (do_sdhci_init(host)) {
>>> + printf("%s: failed to initialize dev %d\n",
>>> __func__, i);
>>> + return -2;
>>
>> IMHO, it would be better to write this code as follows:
>>
>> ret = do_sdhci_init(host);
>> if (ret) {
>>
>> printf();
>> return ret;
>> }
>
> I think it should be replaced to "continue;", not "return ret;"
> If returned the fail, then next host can't initialize.(if there is next host..)
> So maybe, it didn't use "return ret".
>

Right.
If succeeded to initialize at least one host, should not be returned an error.

Thanks,
Minkyu Kang.