[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8940259b-5811-ce9f-8262-17d39ca0a46f@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2018 19:32:22 +0530
From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/27] clk: davinci: psc: allow for dev == NULL
On Friday 27 April 2018 05:47 AM, David Lechner wrote:
> +static inline void *_devm_kzalloc(struct device *dev, size_t size, gfp_t flags)
> +{
> + if (dev)
> + return devm_kzalloc(dev, size, flags);
> +
> + return kzalloc(size, flags);
> +}
I have the same question on the utility of this. A memory allocation
error so early on is not going to result in a bootable system anyway.
So, I wonder if its better to just BUG() in such cases. That will
actually help faster debug than returning an error back. I know the push
back on using BUG(), but clock drivers are special, and I think thats
why its seems to be used quite a bit already.
Thanks,
Sekhar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists