On 11.12.2024 10:56, Krzysztof Karas wrote:
> drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() may return NULL on failure, which will not
> be caught via IS_ERR(), so replace it with IS_ERR_OR_NULL() macro.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Karas <krzysztof.ka...@intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> index 94198bc04939..6c960416f776 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/display/intel_dp_tunnel.c
> @@ -793,7 +793,7 @@ int intel_dp_tunnel_mgr_init(struct intel_display
> *display)
> drm_connector_list_iter_end(&connector_list_iter);
>
> tunnel_mgr = drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create(display->drm, dp_connectors);
> - if (IS_ERR(tunnel_mgr))
> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(tunnel_mgr))
> return PTR_ERR(tunnel_mgr);
this still will not work as expected, since in case of NULL it will
return 0 (success) instead of "a negative error code" as described in
the documentation of the intel_dp_tunnel_mgr_init()
OTOH the documentation of drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() says: "Returns a
pointer to the tunnel manager if created successfully or NULL in case of
an error" so more appropriate fix seems to be:
- if (IS_ERR(tunnel_mgr))
- return PTR_ERR(tunnel_mgr);
+ if (!tunnel_mgr)
+ return -ENOMEM;
but then it will not work with the drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() stub which
actually returns undocumented ERR_PTR(-EOPNOTSUPP)
so unless you are ready to update implementation and documentation of
the drm_dp_tunnel_mgr_create() to return ERR_PTR instead of NULL in case
of error, the fix IMO should look more like:
+ if (!tunnel_mgr)
+ return -ENOMEM;
and keep existing IS_ERR check
>
> display->dp_tunnel_mgr = tunnel_mgr;
