From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
To: Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@xilinx.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>,
neelisrinivas18@gmail.com,
Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhrajyoti.datta@xilinx.com>,
srinivas.neeli@amd.com, Srinivas Goud <sgoud@xilinx.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
git <git@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpio-xilinx: Check return value of of_property_read_u32
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2022 14:27:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdbkm0C=GUvafi-ZzoqCk6k5fbNQ76GtvRtn_izcKWrVPA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d780076d-ed24-f656-46b1-4d78cd0a17c1@amd.com>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 8:26 AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com> wrote:
> On 6/17/22 18:02, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 17, 2022 at 7:20 AM Srinivas Neeli
> > <srinivas.neeli@xilinx.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> In five different instances the return value of "of_property_read_u32"
> >> API was neither captured nor checked.
> >>
> >> Fixed it by capturing the return value and then checking for any error.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@xilinx.com>
> >> Addresses-Coverity: "check_return"
> >
> > I think the best course of action here is to go and fix Coverity while
> > marking these as false positives.
> >
> > To the idea of castings -- this is not good style and (many?)
> > maintainers in kernel do not accept such "workaround" for fixing
> > broken tool.
>
> Let's wait for Linus what he will say about it.
> I can't see nothing wrong about declaring that I am intentionally ignoring
> return code.
I don't think this patch should be applied.
The problem with static analysis is that such tools have no feeling
for context at all, and in this case the context makes it pretty
clear why it is safe to ignore these return values.
But we need to adopt the tool to the code not adopt the code to
the tool.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-28 12:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-17 5:19 [PATCH] gpio: gpio-xilinx: Check return value of of_property_read_u32 Srinivas Neeli
2022-06-17 6:02 ` Michal Simek
2022-06-17 16:02 ` Andy Shevchenko
2022-06-20 6:26 ` Michal Simek
2022-06-28 12:27 ` Linus Walleij [this message]
2022-06-29 7:31 ` Michal Simek
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CACRpkdbkm0C=GUvafi-ZzoqCk6k5fbNQ76GtvRtn_izcKWrVPA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=git@xilinx.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.simek@amd.com \
--cc=michal.simek@xilinx.com \
--cc=neelisrinivas18@gmail.com \
--cc=sgoud@xilinx.com \
--cc=shubhrajyoti.datta@xilinx.com \
--cc=srinivas.neeli@amd.com \
--cc=srinivas.neeli@xilinx.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).