On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:24:50PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 01:10:57PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > In this specific case, writing it as "if (ret != 0)" caused the bug. If > > we had written it as "if (ret) return ret;" then there are no zeroes so > > wouldn't have been any temptation to return the zero instead of the ret. > > I did a search to see if returning the zero instead of the ret was a > common mistake and it seems like it might be. I did: > > grep 'if (ret != 0)' drivers/ -r -A1 -n | grep "return 0;" | perl -ne > 's/.c-(\d+)-/.c:$1/; print' > > drivers/gpu/drm/nouveau/nouveau_display.c:111 return 0; This is also ok, the function is supposed to return ret or-ed with the relevant flags based on the scan position. It is considered error if 0 is returned (without any flag).
regards sudip -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
