spi_new_ancillary_device() returns the new struct spi_device, or an
ERR_PTR() on failure, but its kernel-doc says "0 on success; negative
errno on failure", which was never true. Describe the pointer.

Fixes: 0c79378c0199 ("spi: add ancillary device support")
Assisted-by: LLM
Signed-off-by: Karl Mehltretter <kmehltretter@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/spi/spi.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi.c b/drivers/spi/spi.c
index 5b5b3bc5f0d8cf8ba60a1785acc695710865edad..172141650b648694d4163d0ba00746ed2948ccfa 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi.c
@@ -2893,7 +2893,7 @@ static void of_register_spi_devices(struct spi_controller *ctlr) { }
  *
  * This may only be called from main SPI device's probe routine.
  *
- * Return: 0 on success; negative errno on failure
+ * Return: the new device on success; an ERR_PTR() on failure
  */
 struct spi_device *spi_new_ancillary_device(struct spi_device *spi,
 					     u8 chip_select)
-- 
2.39.5 (Apple Git-154)

On Sat, 12 Sep 2026 01:02:11 +0200, Karl Mehltretter wrote:
> spi: Fix the return value in spi_new_ancillary_device() kernel-doc

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-7.4

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: Fix the return value in spi_new_ancillary_device() kernel-doc
      https://git.kernel.org/broonie/spi/c/3742867ce965

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark