On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 10:51 AM Liu, Yongxin <yongxin....@windriver.com> wrote: >
[snip] > > > true); > > > > > > - err = ixgbe_mii_bus_init(hw); > > > - if (err) > > > - goto err_netdev; > > > + ixgbe_mii_bus_init(hw); > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > -err_netdev: > > > - unregister_netdev(netdev); > > > err_register: > > > ixgbe_release_hw_control(adapter); > > > ixgbe_clear_interrupt_scheme(adapter); > > > -- > > > 2.14.4 > > > > > > > Then we should check if err == -ENODEV, not outright ignore all potential > > errors, right? > > > > Hm, it is weird to take -ENODEV as a no error. > How about just return 0 instead of -ENODEV in the following function? > No, it's perfectly fine. -ENODEV means there's no device and this can happen. The caller can then act accordingly - for example: ignore that fact. We do it in several places[1]. Bartosz [snip] [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c#L714
