From a6f26606ddd03c5eab8b2132f1bfaa768c06158f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dan Carpenter Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2019 09:56:04 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] rtc: rv3029: revert error handling patch to rv3029_eeprom_write() My error handling "cleanup" was totally wrong. Both the "err" and "ret" variables are required. The "err" variable holds the error codes for rv3029_eeprom_enter/exit() and the "ret" variable holds the error codes for if actual write fails. In my patch if the write failed, the function probably still returned success. Reported-by: Tom Evans Fixes: 97f5b0379c38 ("rtc: rv3029: Clean up error handling in rv3029_eeprom_write()") Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20190817065604.GB29951@mwanda Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni --- drivers/rtc/rtc-rv3029c2.c | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rv3029c2.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rv3029c2.c index 4a0e8ec015cc..4cdf6588e1d9 100644 --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rv3029c2.c +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rv3029c2.c @@ -278,13 +278,13 @@ static int rv3029_eeprom_read(struct device *dev, u8 reg, static int rv3029_eeprom_write(struct device *dev, u8 reg, u8 const buf[], size_t len) { - int ret; + int ret, err; size_t i; u8 tmp; - ret = rv3029_eeprom_enter(dev); - if (ret < 0) - return ret; + err = rv3029_eeprom_enter(dev); + if (err < 0) + return err; for (i = 0; i < len; i++, reg++) { ret = rv3029_read_regs(dev, reg, &tmp, 1); @@ -300,11 +300,11 @@ static int rv3029_eeprom_write(struct device *dev, u8 reg, break; } - ret = rv3029_eeprom_exit(dev); - if (ret < 0) - return ret; + err = rv3029_eeprom_exit(dev); + if (err < 0) + return err; - return 0; + return ret; } static int rv3029_eeprom_update_bits(struct device *dev, -- 2.45.2