[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c82487a125591c14e66ba56dc3202aa0093f0aba.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 13:57:07 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Phil Edworthy <phil.edworthy@...esas.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: Add of_clk_get_by_name_optional() function
On Mon, 2018-07-30 at 10:55 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 10:36 AM Phil Edworthy
> <phil.edworthy@...esas.com> wrote:
> > +struct clk *of_clk_get_by_name_optional(struct device_node *np,
> > + const char *name)
> > +{
> > + if (!np)
> > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
>
> Shouldn't this return NULL?
> Or let __of_clk_get_by_name() handle that (cfr. above)?
>
> Hmm, of_clk_get_by_name() has a similar check, while the current
> __of_clk_get_by_name() already handle np == NULL, too.
This check is needed to prevent NULL pointer dereference below.
And I agree that absence of device node should be considered as okay
case for optional clock (!CONFIG_OF case, for example).
> > +
> > + return __of_clk_get_by_name(np, np->full_name, name, true);
> > +}
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists