[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140310112929.GY21483@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2014 11:29:29 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kevin.z.m.zh@...il.com, sunny@...winnertech.com,
shuge@...winnertech.com, zhuzhenhua@...winnertech.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: mv64xxx: Fix compilation breakage
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:58:08AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 04:08:36PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 03:59:30PM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> > > @@ -900,7 +902,8 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_probe(struct platform_device *pd)
> > > exit_free_irq:
> > > free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data);
> > > exit_reset:
> > > - if (pd->dev.of_node && !IS_ERR(drv_data->rstc))
> > > + if (pd->dev.of_node && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER) &&
> > > + !IS_ERR(drv_data->rstc))
> > > reset_control_assert(drv_data->rstc);
> >
> > Another question is... why do we need to check pd->dev.of_node here?
> > If CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER is set, we always try to get the reset
> > controller node, so drv_data->rstc is either going to be a valid
> > pointer, or it's going to be an error pointer - neither
> > reset_control_get() nor devm_reset_control_get return NULL.
>
> Following back on this as I was doing the patch, actually,
> drv_data->rstc will be NULL if we're not probed by DT, and hence never
> call reset_control_get, that would set an error pointer.
>
> But then, we can use IS_ERR_OR_NULL on drv_data->rstc.
I think you can also move the devm_reset_control_get() into the main
probe function: you're only checking for -EPROBE_DEFER from it to fail,
allowing other errors to continue with the driver init. This means
that on non-OF, devm_reset_control_get() will fail with -ENOENT.
--
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.
--
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