[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130209135202.C8EA73E30EC@localhost>
Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2013 13:52:02 +0000
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/33] gpio: Convert to devm_ioremap_resource()
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:22:21 +0530, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Thierry Reding
> <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de> wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-spear-spics.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-spear-spics.c
> > index 5f45fc4..7a4bf7c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-spear-spics.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-spear-spics.c
> > @@ -140,11 +140,9 @@ static int spics_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > }
> >
> > - spics->base = devm_request_and_ioremap(&pdev->dev, res);
> > - if (!spics->base) {
> > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "request and ioremap fail\n");
>
> can we keep it as is?
And this is why I dislike the ERR_PTR pattern so much. It goes against
every instinct about what is and is not a valid pointer.
I know people want error codes, but I think hoping that all users will
remember to do 'if (IS_ERR(ptr))' instead of 'if (!ptr)' makes things
worse not better.
g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists