Re: [PATCH v1] ieee802154: at86rf230: Simplify with dev_err_probe()

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 30/08/2024 20:16, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 07:43:30PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 30/08/2024 18:02, Simon Horman wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 04:14:02PM +0800, Shen Lichuan wrote:
>>>> Use dev_err_probe() to simplify the error path and unify a message
>>>> template.
>>>>
>>>> Using this helper is totally fine even if err is known to never
>>>> be -EPROBE_DEFER.
>>>>
>>>> The benefit compared to a normal dev_err() is the standardized format
>>>> of the error code, it being emitted symbolically and the fact that
>>>> the error code is returned which allows more compact error paths.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shen Lichuan <shenlichuan@xxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> @@ -1576,9 +1574,8 @@ static int at86rf230_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
>>>>  
>>>>  	lp->regmap = devm_regmap_init_spi(spi, &at86rf230_regmap_spi_config);
>>>>  	if (IS_ERR(lp->regmap)) {
>>>> -		rc = PTR_ERR(lp->regmap);
>>>> -		dev_err(&spi->dev, "Failed to allocate register map: %d\n",
>>>> -			rc);
>>>> +		dev_err_probe(&spi->dev, PTR_ERR(lp->regmap),
>>>> +			      "Failed to allocate register map\n");
>>>>  		goto free_dev;
>>>
>>> After branching to dev_free the function will return rc.
>>> So I think it still needs to be set a in this error path.
>>
>> Another bug introduced by @vivo.com.
>>
>> Since ~2 weeks there is tremendous amount of trivial patches coming from
>> vivo.com. I identified at least 5 buggy, where the contributor did not
>> understand the code.
>>
>> All these "trivial" improvements should be really double-checked.
> 
> Are you concerned about those that have been accepted?

Yes, both posted and accepted. I was doing brief review (amazingly
useless 2 hours...) what's on the list and so far I think there are 6
cases of wrong/malicious dev_err_probe(). One got accepted, I sent a revert:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240830170014.15389-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx/

But the amount of flood from vivo.com started somehow around 20th of
August (weirdly after I posted set of cleanups and got review from
Jonathan...), is just over-whelming. And many are just ridiculously
split, like converting one dev_err->dev_err_probe in the driver, leaving
rest untouched.

I think this was some sort of trivial automation, thus none of the
patches were actually reviewed before posting.

Best regards,
Krzysztof