[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4230060.J8vOtLMJv4@wuerfel>
Date: Wed, 04 May 2016 14:35:01 +0200
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reset: allow to pass NULL pointer to reset_control_put()
On Wednesday 04 May 2016 20:34:09 Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> I thought about that a bit,
> but there might be some (not nice) drivers that rely on the current behavior.
> I did not want to break any boards with my patch.
>
> So, should it be
>
> if (!rstc)
> return;
> or, perhaps
>
> if (!rstc || WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(rstc)))
> return;
I think the latter is fine, but it would also be good which of the six
callers of the function actually rely on that behavior today, if any.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists