Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] stmmac: fix check for phydev being open | From | Sergei Shtylyov <> | Date | Tue, 8 Sep 2015 22:53:51 +0300 |
| |
Hello.
On 09/08/2015 03:46 PM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
>>> Current check of phydev with IS_ERR(phydev) may make not much sense >>> because of_phy_connect() returns NULL on failure instead of error value. >>> >>> Still for checking result of phy_connect() IS_ERR() makes perfect sense. >>> >>> So let's use combined check IS_ERR_OR_NULL() that covers both cases. >>> >>> Cc: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com> >>> Cc: Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@st.com> >>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>> Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> >>> Signed-off-by: Alexey Brodkin <abrodkin@synopsys.com> >>> --- >>> >>> Changes compared to v2: >>> * Updated commit message with mention of of_phy_connect() instead of >>> of_phy_attach(). >>> * Return ENODEV in case of of_phy_connect() failure >>> >>> Changes compared to v1: >>> * Use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() instead of discrete checks for null and err >>> >>> drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 7 +++++-- >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c >>> index 864b476..e2c9c86 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c >>> @@ -837,9 +837,12 @@ static int stmmac_init_phy(struct net_device *dev) >>> interface); >>> } >>> >>> - if (IS_ERR(phydev)) { >>> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(phydev)) { >>> pr_err("%s: Could not attach to PHY\n", dev->name); >>> - return PTR_ERR(phydev); >>> + if (!phydev) >>> + return -ENODEV; >>> + else >>> + return PTR_ERR(phydev); >> >> Don't need *else* after *return* and scripts/checkpatch.pl should have >> complained about that. > > ./scripts/checkpatch.pl 0001-stmmac-fix-check-for-phydev-being-open.patch > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 14 lines checked
Hm... I bet I saw such warning from checkpatch.pl recently (it was a false positive though, so maybe the check was removed recently, not sure). Your patch is clean indeed, however my comment is still valid.
> -Alexey
MBR, Sergei
| |