On 18/11/2025 05:37, Vishnu Saini wrote:
> +static void lt8713sx_reset(struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx)
> +{
> + pr_debug("reset bridge.\n");
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(lt8713sx->reset_gpio, 1);
> + msleep(20);
> +
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(lt8713sx->reset_gpio, 0);
> + msleep(20);
> +
> + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(lt8713sx->reset_gpio, 1);
> + msleep(20);
> + pr_debug("reset done.\n");
No, it is not done, because you kept the device in the reset. 1 is
reset. Don't mix up line and logical signals.
> +}
> +
> +static int lt8713sx_regulator_init(struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + lt8713sx->supplies[0].supply = "vdd";
> + lt8713sx->supplies[1].supply = "vcc";
> +
> + ret = devm_regulator_bulk_get(lt8713sx->dev, 2, lt8713sx->supplies);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return dev_err_probe(lt8713sx->dev, ret, "failed to get
> regulators\n");
> +
> + ret = regulator_set_load(lt8713sx->supplies[0].consumer, 200000);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return dev_err_probe(lt8713sx->dev, ret, "failed to set
> regulator load\n");
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int lt8713sx_regulator_enable(struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx)
> +{
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = regulator_enable(lt8713sx->supplies[0].consumer);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return dev_err_probe(lt8713sx->dev, ret, "failed to enable vdd
> regulator\n");
> +
> + usleep_range(1000, 10000);
> +
> + ret = regulator_enable(lt8713sx->supplies[1].consumer);
> + if (ret < 0) {
> + regulator_disable(lt8713sx->supplies[0].consumer);
> + return dev_err_probe(lt8713sx->dev, ret, "failed to enable vcc
> regulator\n");
> + }
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int lt8713sx_gpio_init(struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx)
> +{
> + struct device *dev = lt8713sx->dev;
> +
> + lt8713sx->reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get(dev, "reset", GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> + if (IS_ERR(lt8713sx->reset_gpio))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(lt8713sx->reset_gpio),
> + "failed to acquire reset gpio\n");
> +
> + /* power enable gpio */
> + lt8713sx->enable_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "enable",
> GPIOD_OUT_HIGH);
> + if (IS_ERR(lt8713sx->enable_gpio))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(lt8713sx->enable_gpio),
> + "failed to acquire enable gpio\n");
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static ssize_t lt8713sx_firmware_store(struct device *dev,
> + struct device_attribute *attr,
> + const char *buf, size_t len)
> +{
> + struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = lt8713sx_firmware_update(lt8713sx);
> + if (ret < 0)
> + return ret;
> + return len;
> +}
> +
> +static DEVICE_ATTR_WO(lt8713sx_firmware);
> +
> +static struct attribute *lt8713sx_attrs[] = {
> + &dev_attr_lt8713sx_firmware.attr,
> + NULL,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct attribute_group lt8713sx_attr_group = {
> + .attrs = lt8713sx_attrs,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct attribute_group *lt8713sx_attr_groups[] = {
> + <8713sx_attr_group,
> + NULL,
> +};
> +
> +static int lt8713sx_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> +{
> + struct lt8713sx *lt8713sx;
> + struct device *dev = &client->dev;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (!i2c_check_functionality(client->adapter, I2C_FUNC_I2C))
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENODEV, "device doesn't support
> I2C\n");
> +
> + lt8713sx = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*lt8713sx), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!lt8713sx)
> + return dev_err_probe(dev, -ENOMEM, "failed to allocate lt8713sx
> struct\n");
> +
I did not ask for dev_err_probe here. Do you see such pattern anywhere?
No, because there are never error messages on memory allocation (see
coccinelle). Drop.
Please run standard kernel tools for static analysis, like coccinelle,
smatch and sparse, and fix reported warnings. Also please check for
warnings when building with W=1 for gcc and clang. Most of these
commands (checks or W=1 build) can build specific targets, like some
directory, to narrow the scope to only your code. The code here looks
like it needs a fix. Feel free to get in touch if the warning is not clear.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
