Re: [PATCH] usb: ehci-orion: Handle errors of clk_prepare_enable() in probe

From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Evgeny Novikov <novikov@ispras.ru>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	Kirill Shilimanov <kirill.shilimanov@huawei.com>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ldv-project@linuxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: ehci-orion: Handle errors of clk_prepare_enable() in probe
Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 11:11:46 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210828151146.GA288644@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <303a5695-e0c4-1cae-ee1f-6f34a9717b77@ispras.ru>

On Sat, Aug 28, 2021 at 01:47:12PM +0300, Evgeny Novikov wrote:
> Hi Alan,
> 
> On 26.08.2021 18:24, Alan Stern wrote:

> > I don't know whether these errors can occur or not.  To find out, you need to
> > ask someone who knows more about the clock framework.
> > 
> > On the other hand, the fact that the functions do return an error code means
> > that they expect callers to check its value.  In fact, whoever changed the API
> > should have gone through all the callers to make sure they did so.
> > 
> > (Let's put it this way:  If those functions can return an error, we should
> > check the return code.  If they can't return an error then they shouldn't be
> > defined to return an int, so the API should be changed.)
> > 
> > So on the whole, I think making these changes would be a good thing.  At the
> > very least, it will help make all the different EHCI and OHCI drivers
> > consistent with each other.
> Though I may be wrong, but after the discussion with Dan, it does not seem
> that we can expect any considerable changes in the clock API and support
> from the static analysis tools soon. So, if you still would like to see
> corresponding fixes in EHCI and OHCI drivers, I can prepare them.

Yes, please do so.

Alan Stern