fix: Fix problematic error returns

[cuishuang]

Description

Because err has been judged before, err here must be nil.

According to the context logic, it should be intErr

For #29936

TODO only if you're a HashiCorp employee

• Backport Labels: If this fix needs to be backported, use the appropriate backport/ label that matches the desired release branch. Note that in the CE repo, the latest release branch will look like backport/x.x.x, but older release branches will be backport/ent/x.x.x+ent.
  • LTS: If this fixes a critical security vulnerability or severity 1 bug, it will also need to be backported to the current LTS versions of Vault. To ensure this, use all available enterprise labels.
• ENT Breakage: If this PR either 1) removes a public function OR 2) changes the signature
  of a public function, even if that change is in a CE file, double check that
  applying the patch for this PR to the ENT repo and running tests doesn't
  break any tests. Sometimes ENT only tests rely on public functions in CE
  files.
• Jira: If this change has an associated Jira, it's referenced either
  in the PR description, commit message, or branch name.
• RFC: If this change has an associated RFC, please link it in the description.
• ENT PR: If this change has an associated ENT PR, please link it in the
  description. Also, make sure the changelog is in this PR, not in your ENT PR.

[heatherezell]

Hello! Could you provide some context around this change? Is there an open issue tracking a discussion of this? Thanks!

[cuishuang]

Hello! Could you provide some context around this change? Is there an open issue tracking a discussion of this? Thanks!

Thanks for your reply.

Oh, I resubmitted the code with only one change. I believe the issue this change addresses is evident. The same situation can be seen in several other places in the code, such as vault/builtin/credential/userpass/path_users.go#231 and vault/builtin/logical/consul/path_config.go:101.

Do I still need to create an issue?

[heatherezell]

I would appreciate it if you would, and link to this PR, for further context. What may be evident to one person may not be as clear to another. :)
Thanks!!

[cuishuang]

I would appreciate it if you would, and link to this PR, for further context. What may be evident to one person may not be as clear to another. :) Thanks!!

Thank you for your suggestion; I have added the issue. Please review it again.

[cuishuang]

I would appreciate it if you would, and link to this PR, for further context. What may be evident to one person may not be as clear to another. :) Thanks!!

Friendly ping

[VioletHynes]

Thanks! This looks good. Great catch!