From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00EA0C64EBC for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:16:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4EE320809 for ; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:16:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603819001; bh=sXVHnKGNfJmka3AKJsAEnCIAg9yWEv5oSthTVHBwoAo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=Zq/qzG6y4Zrz8IfEwB2HO22b9IEjxu2W/spDgxtGY/FrMbJVNVSuqe81ohAUEs4Fy z1bEe+27CSO0AlYQzcyOmKrtHx+MLqdm/VAcfFFqGTidIMEw6TI1FasjHcIeGIQTYS HEul6xeEsJR+CwX/+POnQodY0s4iZfHs5z5fZkuQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1817974AbgJ0RQe (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2020 13:16:34 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:43196 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1817219AbgJ0ROr (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2020 13:14:47 -0400 Received: from localhost (170.sub-72-107-125.myvzw.com [72.107.125.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EAD920657; Tue, 27 Oct 2020 17:14:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1603818887; bh=sXVHnKGNfJmka3AKJsAEnCIAg9yWEv5oSthTVHBwoAo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=GVjme1F+GqdaD1MbKtfFamLZZYO4rNNhDD9YRBoLgHkh6ERoJ9CKUMg1lAs4Y/Vwr wjOdBhoRSdpxkuWofIOHBNfdyHwY1wv03UUCA/YPr5+4MFfZIhmj1ZpEogMOojcs1D M3HxZiIweRd+cwcbSc2d4DjQkK+SGH8Htw43hStU= Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 12:14:45 -0500 From: Bjorn Helgaas To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Cc: Jingoo Han , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim , Marek Szyprowski Subject: Re: pci-exynos.c coverity issue #1437287 Message-ID: <20201027171445.GA186716@bjorn-Precision-5520> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201027164042.GA123158@kozik-lap> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 05:40:42PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 11:34:46AM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > Hi Jingoo, > > > > Please take a look at this issue reported by Coverity: > > > > 222 static void exynos_pcie_assert_reset(struct exynos_pcie *ep) > > 223 { > > 224 struct dw_pcie *pci = ep->pci; > > 225 struct device *dev = pci->dev; > > 226 > > 1. Condition ep->reset_gpio >= 0, taking true branch. > > 227 if (ep->reset_gpio >= 0) > > > > CID 1437287 (#1 of 1): Unchecked return value (CHECKED_RETURN) 2. > > check_return: Calling devm_gpio_request_one without checking return > > value (as is done elsewhere 112 out of 113 times). > > > > 228 devm_gpio_request_one(dev, ep->reset_gpio, > > 229 GPIOF_OUT_INIT_HIGH, "RESET"); > > > > > > Maybe you can guarantee that it's safe to ignore the return value by > > doing a lot of code analysis, but I think it would be better to check > > like all the other callers do. > > +Cc Marek, > > Hi Bjorn, > > I think this is being removed by Marek's patchset: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-samsung-soc/20201023075744.26200-1-m.szyprowski@samsung.com/ Perfect, thanks!