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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D41DC4321E for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 10:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EA9560F4F for ; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 10:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232195AbhKAKuE (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Nov 2021 06:50:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34600 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231485AbhKAKuB (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Nov 2021 06:50:01 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x529.google.com (mail-ed1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::529]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3755BC061714; Mon, 1 Nov 2021 03:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x529.google.com with SMTP id 5so61906188edw.7; Mon, 01 Nov 2021 03:47:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zg/2TadFIKEh7TRYW+cbcPrXXMeYP+uLlK5UKpxBpLw=; b=cNey6RR/2MQJMRdV1twInABbCQh0fWlFumvTn9ZmvZjapQQ0R6ZZMgVUBVxuPrDjsT CNzD0L5zHXDHvZm02Wg1spSvN5SmmU1gWamirBxIUAjr/2JjLV5RaK00l5GA7dEd2685 sRDKiQq3coI7Ho9Y0riGk//V1pA6JNOXNvRpczAW4diQFzdAOW9Una++uCDaRRx80nIb C1TfXP6fNUMojFQgBU+v6nYLXgaOztwr3VGNMfby1a8bp/81/wLdlChIrRJ2HvGE9MB6 pz+aCRmBpYdkXsk3QONCcyjaCnqb5DF0yw6hk8933tXxaIk2J2iM9SYGe95mMT/Xf5gT +d3g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zg/2TadFIKEh7TRYW+cbcPrXXMeYP+uLlK5UKpxBpLw=; b=k4p4/j4Y2bx8KTuVJb82zHNDqEjkoUXXYzSNDO/YtqylNzZK20lM4OenGT+wARmuKG Ekb7XApX0q/sHtZ9ZdJ+XZptXDpIrgFQoNhvt9JpgtYAkHBii1z6u8Xyav0kdYrf/gyA qHDO3gILZmYMjgSXjCb7wF7ySbPhHYB6ArCdaw0wexQBXygJ/hh+IQ9KmC4y+CGeI8Rq QWW0UdIjycfrkAh+ZsnCWIEyPZf5MU2/f1LEK1J9bN1BRbrriDFHP3TDweJYfMCJkJNU /pI5lzO9pE0Cf7gm0Z95ikwXA8fvnkoG4GmHaaf2IfIbvVJ7b1NLzeKKXm7qFnEBbM4a Sw/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530iBMJWlaRLC9TFH2NRJI89dJ3dHkGIe56weoqSK5EtGyp9xFBz fBpHlpXb0gMToVoUQPQAMUKY/W/nA8CMJOAtdtg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJySaCcDBrU6r8SzLBhTIbJZlf+fF53ZHRxezNfwopiw5Zt9GadJlgc+nytfqMugPh8RZuSg6C9nEq4qwg0wFg0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:207c:: with SMTP id bd28mr29631823edb.240.1635763646840; Mon, 01 Nov 2021 03:47:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211025094119.82967-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20211025094119.82967-9-hdegoede@redhat.com> <8804fa29-d0d9-14a9-e48e-268113a79d07@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2021 12:46:37 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 08/11] platform/x86: int3472: Add get_sensor_adev_and_name() helper To: Hans de Goede Cc: "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Mark Gross , Andy Shevchenko , Wolfram Sang , Mika Westerberg , Daniel Scally , Laurent Pinchart , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Len Brown , ACPI Devel Maling List , Platform Driver , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-i2c , Sakari Ailus , Kate Hsuan , Linux Media Mailing List , linux-clk Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 12:44 PM Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Nov 1, 2021 at 12:31 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > > On 10/25/21 13:31, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 12:42 PM Hans de Goede wrote: ... > > >> + if (ret == 0 && sensor_adev_ret) > > >> + *sensor_adev_ret = sensor; > > >> + else > > >> + acpi_dev_put(sensor); > > >> + > > >> + return ret; ... > > > if (sensor_adev_ret) > > > *sensor_adev_ret = sensor; > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > ? > > > > That misses an acpi_dev_put(sensor) when sensor_adev_ret == NULL. > > else > acpi_dev_put(...); > > ? Hmm... But then in the original code and with this proposal the acpi_dev_put() seems a bit strange to me. If we are fine (no error code returned) why would the caller (note _er_) go different paths? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko