On Thu, Jun 9, 2022 at 5:23 PM Pierre-Louis Bossart pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com wrote:
Thanks Rafael. This looks mostly good but I have a doubt on the error handling, see below.
+static int sdw_acpi_check_duplicate(struct acpi_device *adev, void *data) +{
struct sdw_acpi_child_walk_data *cwd = data;
struct sdw_bus *bus = cwd->bus;
struct sdw_slave_id id;
if (adev == cwd->adev)
return 0;
if (!find_slave(bus, adev, &id))
return 0;
if (cwd->id.sdw_version != id.sdw_version || cwd->id.mfg_id != id.mfg_id ||
cwd->id.part_id != id.part_id || cwd->id.class_id != id.class_id)
return 0;
if (cwd->id.unique_id != id.unique_id) {
dev_dbg(bus->dev,
"Valid unique IDs 0x%x 0x%x for Slave mfg_id 0x%04x, part_id 0x%04x\n",
cwd->id.unique_id, id.unique_id, cwd->id.mfg_id,
cwd->id.part_id);
cwd->ignore_unique_id = false;
return 0;
}
dev_err(bus->dev,
"Invalid unique IDs 0x%x 0x%x for Slave mfg_id 0x%04x, part_id 0x%04x\n",
cwd->id.unique_id, id.unique_id, cwd->id.mfg_id, cwd->id.part_id);
return -ENODEV;
if this error happens, I would guess it's reported ....
+}
+static int sdw_acpi_find_one(struct acpi_device *adev, void *data) +{
struct sdw_bus *bus = data;
struct sdw_acpi_child_walk_data cwd = {
.bus = bus,
.adev = adev,
.ignore_unique_id = true,
};
int ret;
if (!find_slave(bus, adev, &cwd.id))
return 0;
/* Brute-force O(N^2) search for duplicates. */
ret = acpi_dev_for_each_child(ACPI_COMPANION(bus->dev),
sdw_acpi_check_duplicate, &cwd);
if (ret)
return ret;
... here, but I don't see this being propagated further...
if (cwd.ignore_unique_id)
cwd.id.unique_id = SDW_IGNORED_UNIQUE_ID;
/* Ignore errors and continue. */
sdw_slave_add(bus, &cwd.id, acpi_fwnode_handle(adev));
return 0;
+}
/*
- sdw_acpi_find_slaves() - Find Slave devices in Master ACPI node
- @bus: SDW bus instance
@@ -135,8 +200,7 @@ static bool find_slave(struct sdw_bus *b */ int sdw_acpi_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus *bus) {
struct acpi_device *adev, *parent;
struct acpi_device *adev2, *parent2;
struct acpi_device *parent; parent = ACPI_COMPANION(bus->dev); if (!parent) {
@@ -144,52 +208,7 @@ int sdw_acpi_find_slaves(struct sdw_bus return -ENODEV; }
list_for_each_entry(adev, &parent->children, node) {
struct sdw_slave_id id;
struct sdw_slave_id id2;
bool ignore_unique_id = true;
if (!find_slave(bus, adev, &id))
continue;
/* brute-force O(N^2) search for duplicates */
parent2 = parent;
list_for_each_entry(adev2, &parent2->children, node) {
if (adev == adev2)
continue;
if (!find_slave(bus, adev2, &id2))
continue;
if (id.sdw_version != id2.sdw_version ||
id.mfg_id != id2.mfg_id ||
id.part_id != id2.part_id ||
id.class_id != id2.class_id)
continue;
if (id.unique_id != id2.unique_id) {
dev_dbg(bus->dev,
"Valid unique IDs 0x%x 0x%x for Slave mfg_id 0x%04x, part_id 0x%04x\n",
id.unique_id, id2.unique_id, id.mfg_id, id.part_id);
ignore_unique_id = false;
} else {
dev_err(bus->dev,
"Invalid unique IDs 0x%x 0x%x for Slave mfg_id 0x%04x, part_id 0x%04x\n",
id.unique_id, id2.unique_id, id.mfg_id, id.part_id);
return -ENODEV;
}
}
if (ignore_unique_id)
id.unique_id = SDW_IGNORED_UNIQUE_ID;
/*
* don't error check for sdw_slave_add as we want to continue
* adding Slaves
*/
sdw_slave_add(bus, &id, acpi_fwnode_handle(adev));
}
acpi_dev_for_each_child(parent, sdw_acpi_find_one, bus);
... here?
It looks like a change in the error handling flow where sdw_acpi_find_slaves() is now returning 0 (success) always?
Shouldn't the return of sdw_acpi_find_one() be trapped, e.g. with
return acpi_dev_for_each_child(parent, sdw_acpi_find_one, bus);
Sure, I'll do that. Thanks!