treewide: add check for NRF_MODEM_LIB_ON_INIT return

[MirkoCovizzi]

Adds missing checks for the return value passed by NRF_MODEM_LIB_ON_INIT.

[NordicBuilder]

CI Information

^{To view the history of this post, clich the 'edited' button above}
Build number: 9

Inputs:

Sources:

sdk-nrf: PR head: 7745d746fe26c8373d7b380ce613d70995a6c7e4

more details

sdk-nrf:

PR head: 7745d746fe26c8373d7b380ce613d70995a6c7e4
merge base: f71d7c1dfcd3ff90aa3f38cdeebdd62af08fd44d
target head (main): 4ba9b34a6f327498e36d332240172eb5f4f2e8ab
Diff

Github labels

Enabled	Name	Description
	ci-disabled	Disable the ci execution
	ci-all-test	Run all of ci, no test spec filtering will be done
	ci-force-downstream	Force execution of downstream even if twister fails
	ci-run-twister	Force run twister
	ci-run-zephyr-twister	Force run zephyr twister

List of changed files detected by CI (14)

applications
│  ├── asset_tracker_v2
│  │  ├── src
│  │  │  ├── modules
│  │  │  │  │ modem_module.c
lib
│  ├── modem_antenna
│  │  │ modem_antenna.c
│  ├── modem_battery
│  │  │ modem_battery.c
│  ├── nrf_modem_lib
│  │  │ cfun_hooks.c
│  ├── pdn
│  │  │ pdn.c
modules
│  ├── memfault-firmware-sdk
│  │  ├── memfault_integration.c
│  │  │ memfault_lte_coredump.c
samples
│  ├── cellular
│  │  ├── lwm2m_carrier
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │ main.c
│  │  ├── modem_shell
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  ├── cloud
│  │  │  │  │  │ cloud_lwm2m.c
│  ├── dect
│  │  ├── dect_phy
│  │  │  ├── dect_shell
│  │  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │  ├── dect
│  │  │  │  │  │  │ dect_phy_ctrl.c
│  ├── net
│  │  ├── mqtt
│  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  ├── modules
│  │  │  │  │  ├── transport
│  │  │  │  │  │  ├── credentials_provision
│  │  │  │  │  │  │  │ credentials_provision.c
subsys
│  ├── net
│  │  ├── lib
│  │  │  ├── lwm2m_client_utils
│  │  │  │  ├── lwm2m
│  │  │  │  │  │ lwm2m_rai.c
│  │  │  ├── nrf_provisioning
│  │  │  │  ├── src
│  │  │  │  │  │ nrf_provisioning.c
│  │  │  ├── tls_credentials
│  │  │  │  │ tls_credentials_nrf_modem.c

Outputs:

Toolchain

Version: 0f22b642ed
Build docker image: docker-dtr.nordicsemi.no/sw-production/ncs-build:0f22b642ed_bece0367df

Test Spec & Results: ✅ Success; ❌ Failure; 🟠 Queued; 🟡 Progress; ◻️ Skipped; ⚠️ Quarantine

• ◻️ Toolchain - Skipped: existing toolchain is used
• ✅ Build twister
  • sdk-nrf test count: 448
• ✅ Integration tests
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_cloud
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_serial_lte_modem
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_zephyr_lwm2m
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_samples
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_lwm2m
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_thingy91
  • ✅ test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_mosh

Disabled integration tests

• • desktop52_verification
  • doc-internal
  • test_ble_nrf_config
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-apps
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_mesh
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-ble_samples
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-boot
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-chip
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-fem
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-nfc
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf-iot_positioning
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-nrf_crypto
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-proprietary_esb
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-ps
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-rpc
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-rs
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-tfm
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-thread
  • test-fw-nrfconnect-zigbee
  • test-low-level
  • test-sdk-audio
  • test-sdk-dfu
  • test-sdk-find-my
  • test-sdk-mcuboot
  • test-sdk-pmic-samples
  • test-sdk-sidewalk
  • test-sdk-wifi
  • test-secdom-samples-public

Note: This message is automatically posted and updated by the CI

[NordicBuilder]

You can find the documentation preview for this PR at this link.

Note: This comment is automatically posted by the Documentation Publish GitHub Action.

[jtguggedal]

Could be convenient with error logging in the application-level callbacks

[MirkoCovizzi]

Could be convenient with error logging in the application-level callbacks

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

[jtguggedal]

Could be convenient with error logging in the application-level callbacks

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

Yeah, and just to indicate to the user that initialization failed and the app won't work as expected

[tokangas]

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

Yeah, and just to indicate to the user that initialization failed and the app won't work as expected

And probably only in apps, not in libraries?

[MirkoCovizzi]

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

Yeah, and just to indicate to the user that initialization failed and the app won't work as expected

And probably only in apps, not in libraries?

I would argue it makes sense in libraries too, some of them do it already. Any specific reason for not doing it in libraries in your opinion?

[jtguggedal]

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

Yeah, and just to indicate to the user that initialization failed and the app won't work as expected

And probably only in apps, not in libraries?

I would argue it makes sense in libraries too, some of them do it already. Any specific reason for not doing it in libraries in your opinion?

Just that it could lead to duplicate logs if the app also reports the error. But that's not really a big problem, so I agree with you that library logging is also good

[MirkoCovizzi]

Do you mean logging the returned value inside the callback?

Yeah, and just to indicate to the user that initialization failed and the app won't work as expected

And probably only in apps, not in libraries?

I would argue it makes sense in libraries too, some of them do it already. Any specific reason for not doing it in libraries in your opinion?

Just that it could lead to duplicate logs if the app also reports the error. But that's not really a big problem, so I agree with you that library logging is also good

I thought about that, but some applications (ex. customer) might not necessarily do it. I will add it then, thanks everyone.