[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191004203933.tfhr6cwbsq2hxrov@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 22:39:33 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com
Cc: kamel.bouhara@...tlin.com, wsa@...-dreams.de,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
Ludovic.Desroches@...rochip.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] i2c: at91: implement i2c bus recovery
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 09:35:23AM +0000, Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com wrote:
> Hi Kamel,
>
> On 02.10.2019 17:46, Kamel Bouhara wrote:
> > +static int at91_init_twi_recovery_info(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > + struct at91_twi_dev *dev)
> > +{
> > + struct i2c_bus_recovery_info *rinfo = &dev->rinfo;
> > +
> > + dev->pinctrl = devm_pinctrl_get(&pdev->dev);
> > + if (!dev->pinctrl || IS_ERR(dev->pinctrl)) {
>
> You may use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() here.
Can devm_pinctrl_get return NULL? From a quick look, it cannot.
rule of thumb: IS_ERR_OR_NULL is wrong as it is a sign of poor return
value semantics.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists