From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2025 14:57:11 +0000 (+0200) Subject: dmaengine: Add a comment on why it's okay when kasprintf() fails X-Git-Tag: v6.15-rc1~75^2~26 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=1722fb4a1307748f983c1345c4c24178d8e0be47;p=thirdparty%2Fkernel%2Flinux.git dmaengine: Add a comment on why it's okay when kasprintf() fails Add a comment in dma_request_chan() to clarify kasprintf() missing return value check and it is correct functionality. Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250205145757.889247-4-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul --- diff --git a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c index c1357d7f3dc6c..dd4224d90f070 100644 --- a/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c +++ b/drivers/dma/dmaengine.c @@ -854,8 +854,8 @@ struct dma_chan *dma_request_chan(struct device *dev, const char *name) found: #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS - chan->dbg_client_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s:%s", dev_name(dev), - name); + chan->dbg_client_name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "%s:%s", dev_name(dev), name); + /* No functional issue if it fails, users are supposed to test before use */ #endif chan->name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL, "dma:%s", name);