On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 05:42:44PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 04:04:14PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > @@ -75,20 +75,16 @@ static int fbtft_request_one_gpio(struct fbtft_par *par,
> >                               struct gpio_desc **gpiop)
> >  {
> >     struct device *dev = par->info->device;
> > -   int ret = 0;
> >  
> >     *gpiop = devm_gpiod_get_index_optional(dev, name, index,
> >                                            GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
> > -   if (IS_ERR(*gpiop)) {
> > -           ret = PTR_ERR(*gpiop);
> > -           dev_err(dev,
> > -                   "Failed to request %s GPIO: %d\n", name, ret);
> > -           return ret;
> > -   }
> > +   if (IS_ERR(*gpiop))
> > +           dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(*gpiop), "Failed to request %s 
> > GPIO\n", name);
> 
> This should be a return statement:
> 
>               return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(*gpiop), "Failed to request 
> %s GPIO\n", name);
> 

I've created a new Smatch check for these:

drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251xfd/mcp251xfd-core.c:2890 mcp251xfd_probe() warn: 
pointer error 'PTR_ERR(clk)' not handled

There aren't that many bugs...  Anyway, I'm running a test now and I
guess we'll see tomorrow how it goes.

regards,
dan carpenter

_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel

Reply via email to