Re: [PATCH] iio: adc: vf610: Add missing check for device_property_read_u32_array

[Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>]

On Wed, 28 Jan 2026 09:29:47 +0000
Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2026-01-28 at 12:27 +0800, Chen Ni wrote:
> > Add check for the return value of device_property_read_u32_array() and
> > return the error if it fails in order to catch the error.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Chen Ni <nichen@iscas.ac.cn>
> > ---
> >  drivers/iio/adc/vf610_adc.c | 5 ++++-
> >  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/iio/adc/vf610_adc.c b/drivers/iio/adc/vf610_adc.c
> > index d7182ed0d2a7..d53723ccc5b2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/iio/adc/vf610_adc.c
> > +++ b/drivers/iio/adc/vf610_adc.c
> > @@ -871,7 +871,10 @@ static int vf610_adc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  
> >  	info->vref_uv = regulator_get_voltage(info->vref);
> >  
> > -	device_property_read_u32_array(dev, "fsl,adck-max-frequency", info->max_adck_rate, 3);
> > +	ret = device_property_read_u32_array(dev, "fsl,adck-max-frequency",
> > +					     info->max_adck_rate, 3);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;  
> 
> As Andy pointed out, this is changing behavior so it needs to be properly justified. Also since we
> are here, maybe use ARRAY_SIZE(info->max_adck_rate).
> 
Given the driver has a fallback for info->max_adck_rate[x] == 0
I think this is intentional.  It would be clearer if this had done.

	info->max_adck_rate[0] = 8;
	info->max_adck_rate[1] = 8;
	info->max_adck_rate[2] = 8;
	device_property_read_u32_array(dev, "fsl,adck-max-frequency", info->max_adck_rate, 3);

though rather than where it has the fallback in vf610_adc_calculate_rates()


> - Nuno Sá
> 
> >  
> >  	info->adc_feature.default_sample_time = DEFAULT_SAMPLE_TIME;
> >  	device_property_read_u32(dev, "min-sample-time", &info->adc_feature.default_sample_time);