[PATCH V6 4/5] regulator: bq257xx: Add bq257xx boost regulator driver

[Dan Carpenter]

Hi Chris,

kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:

https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information]

url:    https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Chris-Morgan/dt-bindings-mfd-ti-bq25703a-Add-TI-BQ25703A-Charger/20250813-054704
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next
patch link:    https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250812214300.123129-5-macroalpha82%40gmail.com
patch subject: [PATCH V6 4/5] regulator: bq257xx: Add bq257xx boost regulator driver
config: xtensa-randconfig-r073-20250819 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20250821/202508210308.Lw2Klipk-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: xtensa-linux-gcc (GCC) 9.5.0

If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp at intel.com>
| Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at linaro.org>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202508210308.Lw2Klipk-lkp@intel.com/

smatch warnings:
drivers/regulator/bq257xx-regulator.c:132 bq257xx_reg_dt_parse_gpio() warn: passing zero to 'PTR_ERR'

vim +/PTR_ERR +132 drivers/regulator/bq257xx-regulator.c

d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  107  static void bq257xx_reg_dt_parse_gpio(struct platform_device *pdev)
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  108  {
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  109  	struct device_node *child, *subchild;
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  110  	struct bq257xx_reg_data *pdata = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  111  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  112  	child = of_get_child_by_name(pdev->dev.of_node,
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  113  				     pdata->desc.regulators_node);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  114  	if (!child)
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  115  		return;
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  116  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  117  	subchild = of_get_child_by_name(child, pdata->desc.of_match);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  118  	if (!subchild)
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  119  		return;
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  120  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  121  	of_node_put(child);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  122  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  123  	pdata->otg_en_gpio = devm_fwnode_gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev,
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  124  							 of_fwnode_handle(subchild),
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  125  							 "enable", 0,
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  126  							 GPIOD_OUT_LOW,
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  127  							 pdata->desc.of_match);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  128  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  129  	of_node_put(subchild);
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  130  
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  131  	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(pdata->otg_en_gpio)) {

This should just be an IS_ERR() check.  When a function returns a mix of
error pointers and NULL, then the NULL is not an error and shouldn't
result in an error message.

https://staticthinking.wordpress.com/2022/08/01/mixing-error-pointers-and-null/

Here devm_fwnode_gpiod_get_index() can't actually return NULL so it
doesn't matter, I suppose.

d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12 @132  		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Error getting enable gpio: %ld\n",
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  133  			PTR_ERR(pdata->otg_en_gpio));
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  134  		return;
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  135  	}
d6db7dce7cd965 Chris Morgan 2025-08-12  136  }

-- 
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki