[PATCH 46/61] vfio: Prefer IS_ERR_OR_NULL over manual NULL check

[Pranjal Shrivastava]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 12:49:12PM +0100, Philipp Hahn wrote:
> Prefer using IS_ERR_OR_NULL() over using IS_ERR() and a manual NULL
> check.
> 
> Change generated with coccinelle.
> 
> To: Alex Williamson <alex at shazbot.org>
> Cc: kvm at vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Philipp Hahn <phahn-oss at avm.de>
> ---
>  drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> index 742477546b15d4dbaf9ebcfb2e67627db71521e0..d71922dfde5885967398deddec3e9e04b05adfec 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/vfio_main.c
> @@ -923,7 +923,7 @@ vfio_ioctl_device_feature_mig_device_state(struct vfio_device *device,
>  
>  	/* Handle the VFIO_DEVICE_FEATURE_SET */
>  	filp = device->mig_ops->migration_set_state(device, mig.device_state);
> -	if (IS_ERR(filp) || !filp)
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(filp))
>  		goto out_copy;
>  
>  	return vfio_ioct_mig_return_fd(filp, arg, &mig);
> 

Reviewed-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan at google.com>

The cleanup alone looks fine, but I'm not sure if the maintainers would
be happy about the tree-wide spam, since each patch might go through a
different tree. I'd wait for Alex's preference/ack on that.

Thanks,
Praan